Quote:
Originally Posted by john.wigley
Thank you, 'Familyman 90', t was both aware of, and agree with that! With respect, though, isn't it stating the obvious, rather?
The issue is, I feel, rather more subtle than you perhaps infer. I'm sure no one sets out to deliberately run down a cyclist, or a pedestrian, for that matter. I know that I don't and I'm equally sure that the driver of the tractor whose trailer was responsible for the death of a cyclist immediately in front of us did not, either.
Nevertheless, a family man in his 60s set out for a ride that fateful Sunday morning and did not return home. That is why I care about this as much as I'm sure you do, but I do not think that statements such as yours above either greatly support the cause or appreciably assist those who may not yet have considered the issue to the depth that you clearly have.
Regards, John.
|
It is a bit of an axiom John but from what i understand from the new regs (saw them briefly online some time back) it is essentially repeating what we already know. Almost as if those writing it are justifying their existence by rewriting rules.
Not sure on the circumstances of the cyclist you mention being wiped out by the tractors trailer but i can imagine he was cycling between the trailer and verge/kerb to make use of the slipstream effect when the tractor turned and the trailer wiped the cyclist off the road.
If so, he'd obviously been lucky until that point.