Came off the bike...need to rant!

TheChizler

AmboMan wrote: »

Thats not why we have amber lights, if you are travelling at a speed that does not allow you time to stop safely at a junction you are at fault.

There is literally no speed where you are guaranteed to have time to stop before the light when the light goes amber. It takes time to react and stop, unless you can guarantee you will be at least this time-distance away from the light when it changes at some point you'll break the amber no matter how slow you're going.

Beasty

messy tessy wrote: »

Also are you meant to salute other cyclists? When did this become a thing?

Have you not heard of cycling etiquette?

No I hadn't either until a thread appeared here on the subject...


:pac:

Rubberchikken

I wouldn't walk or drive past someone after coming off a bike but you said in your first post you were travelling 'at speed so while I'm sorry for you a bit of me says some cop on is needed.
Too many cyclists racing around especially in built up areas as though they were in the tour de France.

tretorn

A woman crssing the road in the city centre was very badly injured last week, she was hit by a twenty two year old cyclist who must have been travelling at some speed, she is in Beaumont so must have a very serious head injury.

To all you men cycling out there and you know who you are, remember what you weigh and how much damage you will do if you plough at full speed into someone, cyclists mostly wear helmets and pedestrians dont. Leave for work on time so you dont have to cycle at full throttle, this is not safe in built up areas.

Im sorry you fell off your bike but you were going too fast, I am glad that it was you who fell and not the poor pedestrian who you might have killed.

helimachoptor

Happened me last year, came off going around a corner a woman pretty much stepped over me and went on her way. Not even a are you OK.

EDit

tretorn wrote: »

A woman crssing the road in the city centre was very badly injured last week, she was hit by a twenty two year old cyclist who must have been travelling at some speed, she is in Beaumont so must have a very serious head injury.

To all you men cycling out there and you know who you are, remember what you weigh and how much damage you will do if you plough at full speed into someone, cyclists mostly wear helmets and pedestrians dont. Leave for work on time so you dont have to cycle at full throttle, this is not safe in built up areas.

Im sorry you fell off your bike but you were going too fast, I am glad that it was you who fell and not the poor pedestrian who you might have killed.

Cos women don’t cycle, right?

messy tessy

Beasty wrote: »

messy tessy wrote: »

Also are you meant to salute other cyclists? When did this become a thing?

Have you not heard of cycling etiquette?

No I hadn't either until a thread appeared here on the subject...


:pac:

I shall wave at everyone tomorrow morning least I offend anyone! :P

Wishbone Ash

tretorn wrote: »

.....To all you men cycling out there and you know who you are, remember what you weigh and how much damage you will do if you plough at full speed into someone, cyclists mostly wear helmets and pedestrians dont. Leave for work on time so you dont have to cycle at full throttle, this is not safe in built up areas.....

I presume you will be posting something similar in the Motor Forum given that 99.9% of road fatalities involve a motor vehicle.

Zillah

I flipped off the bike a week or two ago by getting my own bloody jacket pulled into the spokes of the front tire. Small bump on my head but it bled like a mother (who knew, even tiny cuts to the scalp bleed like hell). I had to practically fend off all the people coming over to ask if I was ok (at least six in the ten minutes it took me to get cleaned up and back up and running).

smacl

Lumen wrote: »

It's impossible to resolve this situation without feeling bad about either yourself or humanity.

I recommend trying to forget it ever happened.

Still banjaxed after a crash in the summer, a narky middle aged cnut before the accident, an even narkier, fatter, older cnut now. I blame humanity, fcuk em, what did humanity ever do for me? Got to be humanity, hardly my fault, I mean reeeely....... As if.

Tenigate

Honestly if i saw a cyclist bombing it and nearly causing an accident, I'd probably be afraid it was a militant cyclist liable to lash out, and I'd give him a wide berth.

AmboMan

TheChizler wrote: »

There is literally no speed where you are guaranteed to have time to stop before the light when the light goes amber. It takes time to react and stop, unless you can guarantee you will be at least this time-distance away from the light when it changes at some point you'll break the amber no matter how slow you're going.

Not really true the system of driving & road raft is based on “The vehicle will always be at the right speed with the correct gear engaged and can always be stopped safely on its own side of the road in the distance that can be seen to be clear."
If you do not have the ability to stop you probably should not be driving.

gozunda

bucketybuck wrote: »

You crashed because you were going too fast for the circumstances. The amber light, the road conditions, the pedestrian and the other road users, you were at a speed that meant you did not safely come to a stop when those circumstances dictated that you needed to. Thats on you and nobody else.

Which is probably why you received little assistance, people tend to have reduced sympathy when they believe the person in need caused their own misfortune.

Travelling at a nornal rate I once skidded on a patch of oil in front of a bus stop (non bus lane). Came off sidways with quite a thump. People at bus stop stood and watched as I gathered myself together, picked up my bike and slowly hobbled off. Not one person made a single move to help - no one offered any assistance - So using YOUR logic exactly what part of my accident made "people tend to have reduced sympathy when they believed the person in in need ( ie me) caused (my) own misfortune.

John_Rambo

Weepsie wrote: »

You're supposed to stop on amber

An amber light means that you must not go beyond the stop line or, if there is no stop line, beyond the light. However, you may go on if you are so close to the line or the light when the amber light first appears that stopping would be dangerous.

In this case, stopping was obviously dangerous as he fell off his bike!

Sorry to hear this OP... can't believe people didn't stop for you.

07Lapierre

OP we’re you actually hurt? And if someone had asked you if you were ok, would you have said yes? Or would you have said “no I’m grand thanks”?
I find that if I crash, I’m usually too embarrassed and all I want is to get up and get going as soon as possible.

magicbastarder

<mod note - several posts deleted. leave the name calling to the playground, for god's sake.>

twowheelsonly

I appreciate where you're coming from but I wouldn't tar everyone with the same brush. Usually some people will stop to help at an accident, some will know what to do to help whilst others may not have a clue, some will stop and stare and some will pop out their phones to get a video !! Many will pass by, whether through ignorance, self centredness or shyness. I'd like to think that I would stop to help, and have done at car and motorbike crashes, but for some people it just doesn't register to stop. There may also be some truth to others suggestions that in some cases people might think "...fleck him...he deserved it.." It doesn't excuse their indifference but to them it might.


On the subject of the accident, on dreary miserable wet winter /autumn mornings with leaves on the road you really do need to slow down. You have to anticipate and presume that perhaps people will step out in front of you and you have to be prepared to stop at a seconds notice, most especially in an urban area. Keep the high speed for weekend runs in the countryside. If you think that no-one is ever going to step out in front of you then you're wrong. It really is that simple !!

Veering slightly off topic.... On various visits to several European cities, primarily in Holland and Belgium, which to be fair have decent cycling infrasturcture, I've never seen cyclists moving at speed in urban areas. You rarely even see them in lycra unless they're heading on a group rideout or training spin. The opposite is true here. We have a poor cycling infrastructure but fellas flying around like they're trying to break records and dressed to do so. Just an observation...

07Lapierre

Just an observation.... sometimes accidents just happen, sometimes, with the best will in the world, things go wrong.

AmboMan

07Lapierre wrote: »

Just an observation.... sometimes accidents just happen, sometimes, with the best will in the world, things go wrong.

I don’t agree with that, thankfully we have moved on from using the word accident when referring to traffic collisions.
The term accident suggests an incident that was unavoidable or happened by chance, this is why fatal & life changing collisions are investigated as there will be one or more contributory factors.

Tenigate

AmboMan wrote: »

I don’t agree with that, thankfully we have moved on from using the word accident when referring to traffic collisions.
The term accident suggests an incident that was unavoidable or happened by chance.

Don't mean to go o.t, but this is a real big govt/thought police-y/sjw thing to do. An academic redefines a word, you learn the new definition, .. you now feel authoritive on a matter by virtue of learning the lingo, then correct someone for using the original meaning of the word. Don't do this.

accident

late Middle English (in the general sense ‘an event’): via Old French from Latin accident- ‘happening’, from the verb accidere, from ad- ‘towards, to’ + cadere ‘to fall’.

noun
noun: accident; plural noun: accidents
1.
. an unfortunate incident that happens unexpectedly and unintentionally, typically resulting in damage or injury.
"he had an accident at the factory"

. a crash involving road or other vehicles.

bucketybuck

gozunda wrote: »

Travelling at a nornal rate I once skidded on a patch of oil in front of a bus stop (non bus lane). Came off sidways with quite a thump. People at bus stop stood and watched as I gathered myself together, picked up my bike and slowly hobbled off. Not one person made a single move to help - no one offered any assistance - So using YOUR logic exactly what part of my accident made "people tend to have reduced sympathy when they believed the person in in need ( ie me) caused (my) own misfortune.

Why ask about my logic when you aren't using any of your own?

Possible reasons for people not helping in one incident do not have to be the same reasons that people did not help in a totally different incident.

I would have thought that obvious.

TheChizler

AmboMan wrote: »

Not really true the system of driving & road raft is based on “The vehicle will always be at the right speed with the correct gear engaged and can always be stopped safely on its own side of the road in the distance that can be seen to be clear."
If you do not have the ability to stop you probably should not be driving.

Except here we're talking about a clear road and a pedestrian stepping into the road against their light. Your initial statement was that the OP should always be able to stop before an amber light.

twowheelsonly

07Lapierre wrote: »

Just an observation.... sometimes accidents just happen, sometimes, with the best will in the world, things go wrong.

That's indisputable but a great many accidents can be avoided or their impact lessened with a little aforethought, including this one by the sounds of it.

Beasty

smacl wrote: »

Still banjaxed after a crash in the summer, a narky middle aged cnut before the accident, an even narkier, fatter, older cnut now. I blame humanity, fcuk em, what did humanity ever do for me? Got to be humanity, hardly my fault, I mean reeeely....... As if.

Reckon I'm older, narkier and fatter....

07Lapierre

twowheelsonly wrote: »

That's indisputable but a great many accidents can be avoided or their impact lessened with a little aforethought, including this one by the sounds of it.

With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight vision, most accidents are

Effects

EDit wrote: »

Cos women don’t cycle, right?

Clearly they can't cycle very fast so don't cause any real damage.

twowheelsonly

07Lapierre wrote: »

With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight vision, most accidents are

Again that's indisputable but foresight can help too !!

Speed
Junction
Amber Light
Wet Leaves
Pedestrian
Morning

All words from the OP. Only one of those factors that the rider can control and that most likely would have been enough to avoid or reduce the impact of this accident. My money is on plenty of foresight the next time he's back on the bike approaching this junction

Effects

twowheelsonly wrote: »

Speed
Junction
Amber Light
Wet Leaves
Pedestrian
Morning
Only one of those factors that the rider can control and that most likely would have been enough to avoid or reduce the impact of this accident.

Or else switch to a car and you don't have to worry about most of the other factors.

gozunda

bucketybuck wrote: »

Why ask about my logic when you aren't using any of your own?

Possible reasons for people not helping in one incident do not have to be the same reasons that people did not help in a totally different incident.

I would have thought that obvious.

I don't believe you are applying an even logic tbh.
Though your sense of righteousness is quite palpable as given in your rhetorical questions.

As to your statement

You said

Which is probably why you received little assistance, people tend to have reduced sympathy when they believe the person in need caused their own misfortune.

The bit highlighted is a general statement given on your part to explain people's behaviour .

I received no assistance whatsover even though I did not cause "my own misfortune" - so do explain why was there no assistance in this instance even though there was no 'reduced sympathy'?

What do suggest were the 'reasons' people did not help?

Many people are happy to be bystanders and gawkers but are often reluctant to offer assistance in my experience.

Deciding 'not to help' and in effect ignoring the potential plight of the person to whom the accident occured however does happen - many times with no obvious reasons

If we really do use perceived blame to decide on whether someone should recieve help or otherwise there remain questions as to why this evidently is not consistent behaviour.

Weepsie

John_Rambo wrote: »

An amber light means that you must not go beyond the stop line or, if there is no stop line, beyond the light. However, you may go on if you are so close to the line or the light when the amber light first appears that stopping would be dangerous.

In this case, stopping was obviously dangerous as he fell off his bike!

Sorry to hear this OP... can't believe people didn't stop for you.

It was only dangerous because of their poor judgement. Approaching a light, any light you should know it my change and drive or cycle accordingly.

Sounds to me the op saw the light change well before it in distance terms but was tipping along fast enough. As soon as it went amber speed should've been reduced.

Luckily any crash I've been in as seen someone ask if I'm okay. Once when clutching my elbow they insisted my arm was grand, despite it being fractured