20 ms·

'Dutch reach' rule change to Highway Code welcomed

147 points by nemoniac 5y ago

thaumasiotes 5y ago
Somewhat incredible that the article about the "Dutch reach" method becoming law doesn't bother to say what the method is.
- pricechild 5y ago
  It does now, a minute later.
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    Quote it for me.
    - taspeotis 5y ago
      > The practice is used widely across Europe and encourages people to open vehicle doors with their opposite hand to avoid injuries to passing cyclists.
      - thaumasiotes 5y ago
        OK. What does the practice actually consist of? Does it require anything? If I'm taken to court, is "I thought about using my left hand, but I decided not to" a defense?
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - ivanbakel 5y ago
      The explanation is under the header of "What is the 'Dutch reach'?". It includes the sentence "It encourages people to use their opposite hand to open a vehicle door, forcing them to turn their body and head when getting out".
    - flawi 5y ago
      > The practice is used widely across Europe and encourages people to open vehicle doors with their opposite hand to avoid injuries to passing cyclists. Literally first paragraph.
    - Cthulhu_ 5y ago
      Please would be nice.
- gerikson 5y ago
  I'm pretty sure that it's opening the car door using your opposing hand, so that you naturally look backwards to ensure there's no cyclist approaching that can be harmed by a suddenly opened car door. I personally use my side mirrors (and curse cyclists riding the Nordic gloom without any form of light).
- iso1631 5y ago
  The article does not say that, indeed the word "law" isn't mentioned once
notapenny 5y ago
For those to lazy to read, it's basically opening the car door with the hand furthest from the door. This automatically turns your shoulder/eyesight and makes it easier to look for passing cyclists. Its taught as a good practice in driving schools in the Netherlands because we have so many cyclists around. Making it a law though and fining people 1000 pounds for opening their door with the wrong hand? Feels a bit excessive.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- BucketsMcG 5y ago
  Which isn't what's happening. The fine is for injuring somebody with your car door, not for failing to follow the officially approved method of opening it. But you'd never get that impression from most of the reporting around this. Deliberately misleading outrage fodder in the headlines, followed ten paragraphs later by a more honest explanation of what's happening, which directly contradicts the original headline. It's pretty disgraceful, but the pervasiveness of it smacks of some lobbying outfit feeding copy to overworked journos.
  - notapenny 5y ago
    Thanks for clearing that up, had to look around a bit but this clears it up https://road.cc/content/news/press-misrepresents-highway-code-changes-289747 https://road.cc/content/news/press-misrepresents-highway-cod... "It is already an offence to open a car door, or cause or permit it to be opened, so as to cause injury, punishable by a maximum fine of £1,000." That makes more sense.
  - notahacker 5y ago
    Yep. To further contextualise this, the Highway Code is a set of guidelines which summarises good practice to avoid breaking actual laws and be seen as a considerate driver. There is a law against driving a vehicle in a dangerous condition, for example, and the Highway Code's suggestion you check the lights and brakes work every time you use the car will tend to reduce the chances of you being fined for driving your car in a dangerous condition. It'd probably be a good idea to do carry out those checks regardless of whether driving a vehicle in a dangerous condition or not. But it's neither necessary nor sufficient to carry out these checks to avoid being fined.
curtisblaine 5y ago
I'm really perplexed as how can they enforce this. Unless a policeman is staring at you intently through you car window in the exact moment that you open your door, how can they know what hand are you using to do it?
- LatteLazy 5y ago
  Brit here. We have a LOT of laws and very little enforcement. Passing a law is seen as a cheap and easy way to "do something" without actually doing anything (especially anything that might need resourcing). We had very strict covid mask rules. 50% ignore them. The government claims they've done all that can be done.
  - iso1631 5y ago
    We don't have any covid mask rules in England. Last time I was in Scotland I saw wide scale adherence to the rules. Haven't been to Wales or NI for a while.
    - LatteLazy 5y ago
      Erg. It's actually much messier than that. The rules for england were rescinded (last night or was it earlier this week). But the laws are still in force, just the Home Sec has said they don't apply. Only they still apply in some places eg on TfL where the mayor decides not the home secretary, And he is keeping that law. But he is also not enforcing it, just asking people only they are legally required to do it. So we have a few laws here. None of them enforced. And loads of covid, though that is much less of a problem now everyone has been offered a vaccine. Im not really bothered, Im just saying we love laws and we don't enforce them at all here in blighty. :)
      - basisword 5y ago
        If TFL is anything like a few months ago there isn't a 'law' requiring mask usage, it's just a condition of carriage[1]. Also, they're enforcing it with enforcement officers. There may not be many and they may do a poor job of actually challenging people but I've seen it at stations a few times.
LatteLazy 5y ago
FYI: this is not becoming law, either criminally or civilly. Just a recommendation from a 3rd party group.
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  > Just a recommendation from a 3rd party group. It's guidance from the government, not a '3rd party group'.
  - LatteLazy 5y ago
    Sort of, but not quite. It's actually published by the DfT and the DVLA. But it's just a pamphlet. It's not a law. Separately the DVLA make standards you need to meet to pass a driving test. Those are not laws, you can break at least some legally. This isn't being added to the test criteria either. So the government recommend you do this. But if you literally never do it in your whole life you wont be punished or sanctioned or inconvenienced in even the smallest of ways. So it doesn't matter any more than the government recommendation to have white wine with fish...
    - chrisseaton 5y ago
      > It's guidance from the government, not a '3rd party group'. > Sort of, but not quite. It's actually published by the DfT What do you think the 'Department of Transport' is a department of if not the government? > It's guidance > So the government recommend you do this. What do you think the difference is between a recommendation and guidance? I said 'It's guidance from the Government' and you corrected me with 'So the government recommend you do this.' Eh?
      - murkle 5y ago
        Yes, it is guidance from the Government (with some legal force) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Highway_Code#:~:text=Although%20failure%20to%20comply%20with,)%20and%20'do%20not' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Highway_Code#:~:text=Altho.... Although failure to comply with the other rules would not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, the Highway Code may be used in court under the Road Traffic Act 1988 to establish liability
adrow 5y ago
https://road.cc/content/news/what-dutch-reach-289813 https://road.cc/content/news/what-dutch-reach-289813 "It is already an offence to open a car door, or cause or permit it to be opened, so as to cause injury, punishable by a maximum fine of £1,000. It is not a new law and drivers who do not use the Dutch Reach technique will not be fined, unless they commit the aforementioned existing offence."
ddek 5y ago
The Highway Code is not strictly law. I think OP has editorialised the title sensationally.
- iainmerrick 5y ago
  Yes, it's not law, and UK drivers (at whom this story is aimed) implicitly know that. The HN title should be changed to the article title.
  - Terry_Roll 5y ago
    It is the Law in some situations. So in the Highway Code, if it says Must or Must Not , then its law. Expand the section called "Wording of the Highway Code". https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/introduction https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/introduction Unfortunately despite all the UK Gov website cheer leading on sites like this, I cant provide a link to the expanded section in question!
    - iainmerrick 5y ago
      I would see those parts as just explaining the law, where the law is a separate thing, rather than defining the law. Maybe that’s just splitting hairs, though.
      - Terry_Roll 5y ago
        Its a bit like the ACPO speeding enforcement guidelines https://www.npcc.police.uk/2018%20FOI/Operations/030%2018%20Speed%20Enforcement%20Guidance.pdf https://www.npcc.police.uk/2018%20FOI/Operations/030%2018%20... https://library.college.police.uk/docs/appref/ACPO-Speed-Enforcement-Guidance.pdf https://library.college.police.uk/docs/appref/ACPO-Speed-Enf... Magistrates will take the above as Law, its one of those grey areas of law, so selective application of the law exists, and thats before you even get into a debate of whether you have a say in the laws that you are born under if you havent moved abroad.
      - pmyteh 5y ago
GuB-42 5y ago
I don't understand how it can become law. Are there any other laws that tell you how to do something, as opposed to the end result? Here, the idea is that you shouldn't hit cyclists with your door, and the way to achieve that is to look, and the "Dutch reach" is a good way to do it. Why isn't the law just "if you hit a cyclist with your door because you didn't look, that's your fault" instead of specifying a particular way of looking (which may be a problem if you have mobility issues). The only thing I think may come into law is that it has to be taught in driving schools.
- DaedPsyker 5y ago
  It's not a law, the highway code does contain legal requirements but it's primary purpose is as a guide, particularly to new drivers.
  - zarzavat 5y ago
    Additionally the Highway Code is the “textbook” for the national driving exam. New drivers have to pass a theory test that follows it closely, and may fail the practical test if they don’t follow its guidelines.
- bramblerose 5y ago
  All the time, especially in low incidence high impact scenarios. You must wear a seat belt ("don't get killed in a crash"), your brake disks must be at least this thick ("you should be able to stop before your brakes fade"), you cannot use a mobile phone while driving ("you must pay attention to what's going on around you"). Concrete requirements are much easier to police, even though they may not reach the intended end goal completely (e.g. distracted driving due to hands free calling).
- KarlKemp 5y ago
  There are countless examples of similar requirements. The license requirement for driving is, for example, a specific instruction how to do something. The law doesn’t just say “must be capable to safely operate a car”. I bet building codes are specific with regards to materials being used. Rules of the road require you to use turn signals to, well, signal turning, even if you could communicate the same with other means.
iso1631 5y ago
Claimed Headline is wrong, and not what the BBC article says. Actual headline is "Highway Code: 'Dutch reach' rule change to Highway Code welcomed" This is guidance on how to avoid knocking people off their bikes, which remains just as illegal as it used to be. Doesn't matter what method you use to achieve that goal, as long as you achieve it. Is it legal in the US to stretch out your arm in the path of a jogger and knock them flying? How about if you do it with a car door? {current headline on HN is “Dutch reach” car door opening method becomes law in the UK (bbc.com)". I suspect the BBC headline was originally that nonsense but was quickly picked up by a second pair of eyes}
- idontwantthis 5y ago
  Drivers who injure or kill bicyclists are rarely punished in America so, > Is it legal in the US to stretch out your arm in the path of a [bicyclist] and knock them flying? How about if you do it with a car door? Kind of.
  - iso1631 5y ago
    Same in the UK, if you want to kill someone, use a car, even if you do get jailed you'll have a far lower sentence
    - bitwize 5y ago
      One of the side effects of more restrictive gun laws is that in countries with such laws, terrorists reach for slower moving, but much larger caliber and just as deadly, projectile weaponry to commit their mayhem (i.e., motor vehicles).
      - iso1631 5y ago
        Who said anything about terrorists? We had terrorists blowing up the UK from the 70s onwards (and before really) with bombs. Very few events where someone uses a car to kill someone for political purposes though. Someone found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving usually get far lighter sentences than those found guilty of causing death by manslaughter, and the majority of car drivers that cause death don't even get charged
jjp 5y ago
Dutch reach is one of many recommended behavioural changes - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-changes-you-need-to-know-from-29-january-2022 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-change...
frankfrankfrank 5y ago
What a contrived crutch being pushed as some kind of futuristic advancement … as is clearly identified by the pulsing techno melody. This is such a great example of navel gazing, self-congratulatory pontification that is detached from reality. Just look in the mirrors and over your shoulder before opening the door like you are supposed to. If people aren’t doing that already, how is them also not following this additional practice going to improve anything? Short answer, it won’t. Just check your surroundings. No self-important technocratic complication needed.
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  > Just look in the mirrors and over your shoulder before opening the door That’s literally what they’re encouraging. That’s what the Dutch Reach is - a way to look in your mirrors and over your shoulder.
  - frankfrankfrank 5y ago
    You are missing the point. Just do the fundamentals and no other complications are necessary. The problem is likely a far different one, one of people not following the fundamentals, likely because they are not urban drivers or are even foreigners. I check my surroundings before I get out in most parking situations, yet I currently I live in a place where drivers don’t even check both sides when turning at an unregulated intersection as if pedestrians and cyclists simply don’t exist. That being said, ultimately as a cyclist myself, I trust exactly 0 laws to keep me safe and am 100% untrusting off all other vehicles and people. Because reality simply is that I am the squishy human and they are the mechbot driver. Did you notice that not a single person in the video report/demonstration even wore a helmet while racing past cars at unsafe speeds and distances? That weird sense of entitlement of cyclists is something I simply cannot understand. You are responsible for you’re own safety, so slow down and keep a distance like a smart person would.
    - chrisseaton 5y ago
      > Just do the fundamentals This is a way to achieve exactly that! > or are even foreigners Oh no not foreigners! Do you think people don't know how to drive in other countries?
jillesvangurp 5y ago
The guidance on this in the Netherlands is actually being relaxed somewhat: https://www.nu.nl/binnenland/6180537/autodeur-met-verste-hand-openen-is-volgens-ministerie-soms-juist-gevaarlijker.html https://www.nu.nl/binnenland/6180537/autodeur-met-verste-han... (in Dutch). The Dutch government actually issues a message earlier this week (probably in response to what the UK is doing) with the updated guidance. Apparently, it's not that safe in some recent cars due to the position of the door handle. So it no longer is something that is checked during driving exams anymore. Nor is it required to be teaching it during driving lessons. And the guidance is to simply pay attention.
- yourusername 5y ago
  As a Dutch driver i only know about this technique from foreign media. I was never taught to do this during my driving lessons, don't do it and don't know anyone else that opens their door this way.
  - lucb1e 5y ago
    Also a Dutch driver: I was taught this (around 2010 this was), but yeah I've never heard of it outside of driving school (until today) and I'm pretty sure it wasn't checked during my exam.
  - alamortsubite 5y ago
    I'm an American driver who (obviously) wasn't taught this, either. However, I read about it around the same time a bicycle gutter was painted in front of my house, and it stuck with me. As a result, every time I open my car door I think "Dutch Reach!" and I check my mirror for cyclists (I don't actually open the door with my opposite hand). So even if it's apocryphal, it's a catchy idea and you should take the credit. My full technique also involves popping the door only a few inches and allowing it to sit that way for a couple seconds, then opening it slowly, just to be doubly cautious.
    - frankfrankfrank 5y ago
      I think your technique of keeping the door ajar even just two or three seconds is a better idea than this convoluted Dutch reach. It gives any cyclist information that a door is opening. But as I’ve said, if everyone just uses their mirrors it’s unnecessary because you will know there are no cyclists coming. Another point that is missed is why don’t cyclists ride in the middle of the street and/or slow down a bit. It is always astonishing to me how entitled and utterly recklessly cyclists ride around as if the supposed rights they have are some kind of divine protection. You’re the squishy human that has nothing protecting it, rider like it may kill your, because it can. And did anyone else notice not a single person was wearing a helmet in the video? I’m not one to force people to wear helmets, but there again is that weird entitlement of cyclists. So now people have to do some convoluted reach because cyclists race past car doors without a helmet on. Have you ever seen cyclists in Dutch cities, they are simply stupid risk takers.
aaron695 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
tialaramex 5y ago
Tweaks to make people look the right way are very effective. When I was a child the UK had a lot of Pelican crossings. A Pelican consists of almost normal red/amber/green lamps for motor traffic, plus cross/don't cross indications mounted on the same poles for pedestrians, you press a button, you stare at the red "Don't cross" symbol on the far side of the road, eventually the car signals change to red (stop) then yours change to green (cross) and you can cross the road. Sometimes these are independent, sometimes they're tied into a junction and follow a light sequence for the junction (in which case pressing the button may not appear to actually make any difference, especially at peak times) Today though it has a lot more Puffin crossings. Superficially the Puffin is similar, but the Cross/ Don't Cross indication is physically mounted on your side of the road such that to stare at it you're looking towards oncoming motor traffic (in the UK this often, but not always, means facing right). This means now your awareness of that traffic happens as a natural consequence of checking for the indication it's safe to cross. If some lunatic has ignored the lights and is racing towards you anyway there's a better chance you notice as you see it go green. As well as Pelican, and Puffin, and the widely known Zebra, there are also Toucan ("Two can cross" = bicycles as well as pedestrians) and Pegasus (The Pegasus is a mythical winged horse, these are for horse riders) crossings but the principle of these rarer alternatives is the same as for Puffin.
- djbusby 5y ago
  Any pictures of these crossing with fun names? E:I found this once Google understood I wasn't searching for birds or weed https://www.tameside.gov.uk/traffic/pedestriancrossings https://www.tameside.gov.uk/traffic/pedestriancrossings And https://namiyousef96.medium.com/zebra-pelican-puffin-and-toucan-the-uks-pedestrian-crossings-46ac17f8e51d https://namiyousef96.medium.com/zebra-pelican-puffin-and-tou... And of course Wikipedia
  - MatthewWilkes 5y ago
    A Google image search for each will probably be best. They are relatively technical terms within highways, most people wouldn't be able to describe them as well as the person you replied to, so there aren't all that many good diagrams comparing the types.
donatj 5y ago
Cyclists are supposed to follow the same rules as cars. If a car takes out another cars door, the moving vehicle is at fault. If you are going fast enough within the arc of a door that you don’t have time to slow down, you're going faster than you are able to safely control. You are putting yourself and others in danger. You are a missile on the road, slow down or leave more room... It’s irresponsible to cycle that fast by doorways.
- zenexer 5y ago
  In reality, bicycles are often trapped between fast-moving traffic and parked cars for the majority of their travel. At the end of the day, the goal here is to save lives, regardless of who would be at fault. Although, from another user’s comment, it sounds like the person opening the car door would be at least partially responsible, and that was already the case: > It is already an offence to open a car door, or cause or permit it to be opened, so as to cause injury, punishable by a maximum fine of £1,000. Furthermore, getting out of a car can be dangerous. This just seems like a sensible habit. There are no disadvantages.
- jffry 5y ago
  Maybe your jurisdiction has different road rules, but this seems precisely wrong. How can a driver be expected to stop on a dime for a door that opens into a travel lane with zero warning? The responsibility for not thrusting a car door into the path of another vehicle must lie with the only person who is capable of preventing a collision - the person opening the door. Anything else would be a ridiculous policy.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    Either traffic participants of all forms are required to avoid causing a higher speed traffic flow to take evasive action or they're not. I don't care if you're jaywalking, opening a car door, incapable of using the skinny pedal in sufficient quantity when entering the street, whatever, don't do it in front of other faster moving shit that will have to take evasive action regardless of what that type of traffic that other shit happens to be. You wanna jump into a traffic flow that you have no business being in on account of your speed, go ahead, but whatever happens after that is on you. A cyclist is no more at fault for hitting a car door extended 0.2sec of distance in front of them than a train is for hitting whatever tried to beat it to the crossing.
dkarl 5y ago
This is an idea that I found incredibly effective. I heard about it once, started doing it, and now I always do it, and I can always see if someone is coming. When I ride my bike, I always try to stay out of the door zone, but sometimes I'm forced over by oncoming traffic in a tight street. Many streets just aren't wide enough to stay a safe distance away from oncoming traffic and also stay out of reach of doors. (Bicycles are smaller than cars, but cars can safely pass much closer to other cars because the risk is lower — some paint and body work versus possible serious injury. Cars typically slow way down when encountering oncoming cars in a tight street, too, making it safer to get close, but they don't do that as often for cyclists. A final factor is that I think subconsciously drivers don't see the door zone as a dangerous place for cyclists, so they think they're giving you more space than they really are. All these factors mean that a street that feels narrow when I'm driving feels just as narrow and tricky, sometimes even more so, when I'm on my bike.) EDIT: Another final thing that makes staying out of the door zone tricky is when there's parking right next to the bike lane! This seems like an utterly brainless design, maybe it's necessary in some places for reasons I don't understand, but it's horrible and the very existence of the bike lane makes drivers aggressive towards cyclists who aren't in it. I just avoid those streets, but when I can't, I ride in the bike lane and hope not to get doored.
- iso1631 5y ago
  > When I ride my bike, I always try to stay out of the door zone, but sometimes I'm forced over by oncoming traffic in a tight street. Many streets just aren't wide enough to stay a safe distance away from oncoming traffic and also stay out of reach of doors. If you were in a car, what would you do? I admit that it's unlikely that a car driver coming toward you is going to flash you to come forward when they think "there's plenty of space", however you can slow right down and check the parked car occupants to see if they are there. A bigger problem is taxi drivers letting out passengers without checking for traffic, as shown here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI0dPGuP2zE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI0dPGuP2zE (of course the anti-cyclist brigage will complain that he should have been dressed in high viz and wearing a helmet /s)
  - acdha 5y ago
moron4hire 5y ago
My personal habit is to pop the latch for the door so the seal breaks, letting the door move maybe an inch. It's enough to create a very clear line around the door for anyone coming to see that the door is opening. And of course I then always look to see if someone is coming. If we're teaching people in driving school a habit, the "Dutch reach" doesn't actually focus on looking to see if the way is clear. It might incidentally improve how many people look, but why be so passive about it? Just teach people to get in the habit of looking.
- Tijdreiziger 5y ago
  > If we're teaching people in driving school a habit, the "Dutch reach" doesn't actually focus on looking to see if the way is clear. It might incidentally improve how many people look, but why be so passive about it? Just teach people to get in the habit of looking. AFAIK this is what's actually taught in the Netherlands -- look in the side mirror, over your shoulder through the window, and only then open the door.
- jimbob45 5y ago
  I do the same thing with the added benefit of being able to hear screaming, sirens, or anything that would alert me to re-close the door.
erwincoumans 5y ago
People opening car doors without looking first, was one of the things that surprised me after moving to California. In the Netherlands, people are much more careful and make sure there is no bycicle crashing into your opened car door. We have many more bikes in the Netherlands of course.
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  People in SF are just bad at driving in general
Jawriz 5y ago
This is the way.
dncornholio 5y ago
Literally nobody does this. But the Netherlands is the best country in the world when it comes to cycling. The infrastructure is sublime, you are protected physically from most traffic. Some cities have hardly any stoplights and of course all the roads are perfectly flat. Sometimes I fail to realize how good our infra actually is, and what it does to society.
- t0mas88 5y ago
  Indeed, nobody knows this term or rule. But looking out before opening a car door is definitely a thing. Parents also tell their children to do this.
jwmoz 5y ago
As a motorcyclist I welcome any rules which make drivers more aware. Side note: I live in Taiwan and you wouldn't believe how stupid some of the rules are here, it annoys me everyday as it's needlessly dangerous. Some red lights you can drive over, if they are flashing, I believe. And the worst for me is when pedestrian crossing is on green cars can still drive through it so you get drivers needlessly pushing to go over a green crossing even when pedestrians are crossing.
- xnyan 5y ago
  I vividly remember visiting NYC for the first time and being shocked that while starting to cross 8th ave and 15th st, that a yellow cab was already making a turn the second I put my foot in the intersection and was slowing creeping towards me. It's probably just the nature of a big city.
  - tharne 5y ago
    > I vividly remember visiting NYC for the first time and being shocked that while starting to cross 8th ave and 15th st, that a yellow cab was already making a turn the second I put my foot in the intersection and was slowing creeping towards me. I had the exact same reaction the first time I saw this. I was a teenager at the time and remember actually slamming the hood of a turning cab with my fist on more than one occasion, before realizing that what the cabs were doing was normal and accepted behavior.
  - awhitby 5y ago
    At least compared with a few other fairly big cities I've lived in this is a distinctively New York and even Manhattan phenomenon. I drive rarely here but my assumption is that drivers would often never get to turn the corner if they gave crossing pedestrians the polite space they do elsewhere, because of a combination of (foot) traffic density and pedestrians ignoring their light. That last part, I think, is because New York pedestrian lights have a relatively long "red flashing" phase, which combined with New Yorkers being New Yorkers has the counterintuitive effect that everyone treats red flashing, and even the few seconds after, as "go ahead and start crossing."
  - 5y ago
habeebtc 5y ago
This is a great commonsense idea which is likely to have a positive impact. However, given the array of things which have been termed "Dutch" in English, does "Dutch Reach" sound naughty to anyone else?
- fredley 5y ago
  No worse than "Hollywood Handshake"
kiliantics 5y ago
If you drive in an urban environment, please remember to consider other road users (since most road design does not protect people outside of cars). Dooring can be extremely dangerous! Here are a couple examples that illustrate how lethal this simple mindless action could become: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SylGrcN0iTI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SylGrcN0iTI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcTGhlstgQM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcTGhlstgQM And please support traffic calming and safer design of your local streets, as well as increased access to public transit.
mdip 5y ago
As a parent with a child who's learning to drive, I love this idea and I'm teaching it to him. It's funny how many other things like this exist in the driving world. I remember when my parents were teaching me about "backing up", I was told to put my right arm over the back of the passenger seat. This has a similar effect to the "Dutch Reach" in that it forces your body to look completely behind you, covering blind spots in both back corners so that you can see oncoming pedestrians and bike traffic (as well as cross car traffic) on a sidewalk as you cross it.
adhesive_wombat 5y ago
My car has red reflective stripes on the inside of the door edge, so they can be seen from behind as soon as the door is ajar. I put them on myself, since as a cyclist I'd like them on all cars. I don't know why cars don't fit lights and reflectors as standard there. There's always power in modern doors for an LED. At night, that extra second or two of "there's a door opening ahead" could be critical. Only works on bikes with lights, of course. But I'm not very sympathetic to bikes without them.
- awhitby 5y ago
  My guess is the kind of careless people who don't check for cyclists tend to be the kind that throw their doors wide open in one movement, so while this doesn't hurt, it gives cyclists a split-second's warning at best.
  - adhesive_wombat 5y ago
    Certainly, it gives a cyclist a split second if someone opens a door suddenly. That's not what it's really for - nothing can prevent that. For people opening a door sensibly (most people), it gives a unambiguous warning that a door is ajar ahead maybe 5 or 10 seconds before the door opens more. In the dark, where reflectors work, that's a lot more than you might get if you don't notice the door is ajar.
- rtheunissen 5y ago
  Isn't the problem more the car not seeing the cyclist, than it is the cyclist not seeing the door opening?
  - adhesive_wombat 5y ago
    Absolutely it is (I always double check the mirror and crack the door first, even as a passenger) but it's defense in depth, and as a cyclist, if someone's going to open the door anyway, I'd rather be able to see it that assume they've seen me. I have lights, but as a driver, I also know that even the brightest bike lights can by surprising easy to miss. Also, speaking as a cyclist, it can be surprisingly hard to see an opening car door in the dark. The side of the inside of a door is the same colour as the bodywork, so this is not as obvious as you might always expect. It's also not only cyclists who can see this - cars with their light on will see it too, and since I'd quite like my car to continue to have a full set of doors, this is a win for me too. Also, the car carries passengers and is not always driven by me. While obviously, I am completely perfect and am obviously physically incapable of fucking up, I cannot guarantee they will not open their doors badly, so I might as well make an effort to mitigate it in case they do.
tpoacher 5y ago
Personally I'm just waiting for the "all cars are required to have rear cameras which automatically report tailgaters to the police with appropriate fines and point deductions" law. As for the dutch reach, I have a feeling that the most effective way to teach drivers to keep cyclists in mind before doing stupid things, is if you mandated 2 years of compulsory cycling before being allowed to drive a car. ... not that by the same logic, having suffered from tailgaters stops most people from tailgating themselves, but, you know.
sandworm101 5y ago
Is this "rule" a guideline or a law? Is this something they want to teach or are they going to hand out ticket for opening doors with the wrong hand? If this is a guideline, I would suggest that bicyclists (and e-scooters et al) also be instructed to leave distance between themselves and parked vehicles. Motorcyclists have for years been taught to avoid getting so near to parked cars for fear of being "doored". Speeding along only inches from parked cars is dangerous to everyone, especially pedestrians who may be stepping out from between cars.
- mimon 5y ago
  It is a recommendation only, so you won't be fined, but during court proceedings failing to follow this or other recommendations in the highway code can increase your liability. The government announcement of the changes is here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-changes-you-need-to-know-from-29-january-2022 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-change...
  - sandworm101 5y ago
    If its not a law, then I'm not sure it will have much impact in realworld cases. Any collision between a bicycle and a car door remains an impact between a moving vehicle on the road and a stationary vehicle (Technically the word is "allision" when a moving object strikes a fixed object). Longstanding presumptions will remain heavily weighted against the moving vehicle. And proving which hand was used would seem difficult even with blanket camera footage. Even if only a guideline, burden will be on the bicycle to prove that the guideline had been broken.
- overspeed 5y ago
  I ride a bike as my daily driver and have owned and operated motorcycles extensively in the past. Motorcycles should never ride as close to the edge of the road as bikes do. They're faster, bigger and more noticeable. They are given a wider berth compared to bicyclists in my experience since you can take up the middle of the lane without holding up traffic. Riding a bike deeper into (relatively) high speed lanes is more dangerous. Impatient 4+ wheeled beings tend to drive past you putting the bike very close a lot of moving mass.
lamontcg 5y ago
I just check my mirror and crack my door and don't throw it wide open. I don't quite understand the people who need this dutch reach meme to realize that you always need to be careful opening your door into an active traffic lane rather than the hazard being incredibly obvious.
artificialidiot 5y ago
There is a side mirror on the car. Use it.
causality0 5y ago
I was trying to figure out how in the world these accidents happen and then I remembered the poor sods unlucky enough to live where they have to park on the street. Putting bicycles and automobiles on the same road seems like madness in general. I wonder if modern cars with lane-keeping and other such sensor equipment are programmed to check and warn for oncoming cyclists.
- anonymou2 5y ago
  I must be mad, riding my bicycle daily, on the same roads as cars for more than 15 years. 0 accidents. By the way, the simplest way to avoid a dooring accident is not to ride on the door zone. When I see a bike-only lane next to parked cars I take it as an indication of where not to ride. They make bike-only infrastructure to kick us off the roads anyway, not for safety.
bastawhiz 5y ago
Frustratingly, Tesla cars (or at least the Model 3) make this impossible, as there's no handle to pull that unlatches the door.
- patcon 5y ago
  For those wondering what this meant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5nLDkIlZcU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5nLDkIlZcU
aitchnyu 5y ago
I have a pet idea for car doors to make the right thing easy, a Poka Yoke. Invert the door handle and cut out 180 degrees and place it abreast of the drivers chest, so the driver will have a tough time using his closer hand, but he can cup his other hand to slide up and open the handle. The door will open a crack, allowing driver to hear stuff, and exposing reflective markings and lights to warn people behind. The handle forces the Dutch reach, and the door design allows warning time even if driver is oblivious.
rsj_hn 5y ago
I think the problem here is that it's very hard to enforce and requires everyone to open car doors in an unintuitive way. What would be better is an automated system, say something that flashed the rear lights and made a sound before the door opened. Then you would have 100% compliance and people could still open doors in the way that they are accustomed to (which will probably happen anyway). This really is a case where a technological solution is superior to a behavioral solution, and this often happens in the realm of safety. E.g. instead of demanding that drivers give proper distance to cyclists, what we really need is a separate grade that enforces a proper distance. One is a poor substitute for the other, and when you are talking about safety, you want the technical solution over trusting that everyone will voluntarily always do the right thing to avoid an accident.
- Jeff_Brown 5y ago
  Also why we should use statically typed languages.
1nverseMtx 5y ago
Wasn't aware of specific rules around this in the Netherlands and this definitely didn't come up in my drivers exam. The only place I heard about this is foreign media over the past years. However something that does happen in the Netherlands is that kids get taught to pay attention and look around before opening the door of a car, no matter what hand you use. This is something my parents kept insisting over and over. Obviously only anecdotal but I expect this to be the real reason accidents like this are minimal. Combined with having a cycling culture and safer infrastructure where often the cycle lane is separated from parking spaces by some distance to make this impossible.
- t0mas88 5y ago
  Same here. As far as I know this isn't an official rule of any type in the Netherlands, it's just what people do because we have lots of cyclists. And every kids knows because their parents look before opening a door as well.
supergirl 5y ago
I doubt this is as popular as people thing it is. what's the logic of it? the problem is people forget to check before opening the door right? so the same people will just forget to use this uncomfortable "technique".
ivolimmen 5y ago
Weird. I am Dutch and I am not familiar with this rule. I have been taught to open doors this way and I do but I never knew why.. awesome to read this

147 points by nemoniac 5y ago

Somewhat incredible that the article about the "Dutch reach" method becoming law doesn't bother to say what the method is.

pricechild 5y ago
It does now, a minute later.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  Quote it for me.
  - taspeotis 5y ago
    > The practice is used widely across Europe and encourages people to open vehicle doors with their opposite hand to avoid injuries to passing cyclists.
    - thaumasiotes 5y ago
      OK. What does the practice actually consist of? Does it require anything? If I'm taken to court, is "I thought about using my left hand, but I decided not to" a defense?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - ivanbakel 5y ago
    The explanation is under the header of "What is the 'Dutch reach'?". It includes the sentence "It encourages people to use their opposite hand to open a vehicle door, forcing them to turn their body and head when getting out".
  - flawi 5y ago
    > The practice is used widely across Europe and encourages people to open vehicle doors with their opposite hand to avoid injuries to passing cyclists. Literally first paragraph.
  - Cthulhu_ 5y ago
    Please would be nice.
gerikson 5y ago
I'm pretty sure that it's opening the car door using your opposing hand, so that you naturally look backwards to ensure there's no cyclist approaching that can be harmed by a suddenly opened car door. I personally use my side mirrors (and curse cyclists riding the Nordic gloom without any form of light).
iso1631 5y ago
The article does not say that, indeed the word "law" isn't mentioned once

notapenny 5y ago

For those to lazy to read, it's basically opening the car door with the hand furthest from the door. This automatically turns your shoulder/eyesight and makes it easier to look for passing cyclists. Its taught as a good practice in driving schools in the Netherlands because we have so many cyclists around. Making it a law though and fining people 1000 pounds for opening their door with the wrong hand? Feels a bit excessive.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
BucketsMcG 5y ago
Which isn't what's happening. The fine is for injuring somebody with your car door, not for failing to follow the officially approved method of opening it. But you'd never get that impression from most of the reporting around this. Deliberately misleading outrage fodder in the headlines, followed ten paragraphs later by a more honest explanation of what's happening, which directly contradicts the original headline. It's pretty disgraceful, but the pervasiveness of it smacks of some lobbying outfit feeding copy to overworked journos.
- notapenny 5y ago
  Thanks for clearing that up, had to look around a bit but this clears it up https://road.cc/content/news/press-misrepresents-highway-code-changes-289747 https://road.cc/content/news/press-misrepresents-highway-cod... "It is already an offence to open a car door, or cause or permit it to be opened, so as to cause injury, punishable by a maximum fine of £1,000." That makes more sense.
- notahacker 5y ago
  Yep. To further contextualise this, the Highway Code is a set of guidelines which summarises good practice to avoid breaking actual laws and be seen as a considerate driver. There is a law against driving a vehicle in a dangerous condition, for example, and the Highway Code's suggestion you check the lights and brakes work every time you use the car will tend to reduce the chances of you being fined for driving your car in a dangerous condition. It'd probably be a good idea to do carry out those checks regardless of whether driving a vehicle in a dangerous condition or not. But it's neither necessary nor sufficient to carry out these checks to avoid being fined.

curtisblaine 5y ago

I'm really perplexed as how can they enforce this. Unless a policeman is staring at you intently through you car window in the exact moment that you open your door, how can they know what hand are you using to do it?

LatteLazy 5y ago
Brit here. We have a LOT of laws and very little enforcement. Passing a law is seen as a cheap and easy way to "do something" without actually doing anything (especially anything that might need resourcing). We had very strict covid mask rules. 50% ignore them. The government claims they've done all that can be done.
- iso1631 5y ago
  We don't have any covid mask rules in England. Last time I was in Scotland I saw wide scale adherence to the rules. Haven't been to Wales or NI for a while.
  - LatteLazy 5y ago
    Erg. It's actually much messier than that. The rules for england were rescinded (last night or was it earlier this week). But the laws are still in force, just the Home Sec has said they don't apply. Only they still apply in some places eg on TfL where the mayor decides not the home secretary, And he is keeping that law. But he is also not enforcing it, just asking people only they are legally required to do it. So we have a few laws here. None of them enforced. And loads of covid, though that is much less of a problem now everyone has been offered a vaccine. Im not really bothered, Im just saying we love laws and we don't enforce them at all here in blighty. :)
    - basisword 5y ago
      If TFL is anything like a few months ago there isn't a 'law' requiring mask usage, it's just a condition of carriage[1]. Also, they're enforcing it with enforcement officers. There may not be many and they may do a poor job of actually challenging people but I've seen it at stations a few times.

LatteLazy 5y ago

FYI: this is not becoming law, either criminally or civilly. Just a recommendation from a 3rd party group.

chrisseaton 5y ago
> Just a recommendation from a 3rd party group. It's guidance from the government, not a '3rd party group'.
- LatteLazy 5y ago
  Sort of, but not quite. It's actually published by the DfT and the DVLA. But it's just a pamphlet. It's not a law. Separately the DVLA make standards you need to meet to pass a driving test. Those are not laws, you can break at least some legally. This isn't being added to the test criteria either. So the government recommend you do this. But if you literally never do it in your whole life you wont be punished or sanctioned or inconvenienced in even the smallest of ways. So it doesn't matter any more than the government recommendation to have white wine with fish...
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    > It's guidance from the government, not a '3rd party group'. > Sort of, but not quite. It's actually published by the DfT What do you think the 'Department of Transport' is a department of if not the government? > It's guidance > So the government recommend you do this. What do you think the difference is between a recommendation and guidance? I said 'It's guidance from the Government' and you corrected me with 'So the government recommend you do this.' Eh?
    - murkle 5y ago
      Yes, it is guidance from the Government (with some legal force) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Highway_Code#:~:text=Although%20failure%20to%20comply%20with,)%20and%20'do%20not' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Highway_Code#:~:text=Altho.... Although failure to comply with the other rules would not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, the Highway Code may be used in court under the Road Traffic Act 1988 to establish liability

adrow 5y ago

https://road.cc/content/news/what-dutch-reach-289813 https://road.cc/content/news/what-dutch-reach-289813 "It is already an offence to open a car door, or cause or permit it to be opened, so as to cause injury, punishable by a maximum fine of £1,000. It is not a new law and drivers who do not use the Dutch Reach technique will not be fined, unless they commit the aforementioned existing offence."

ddek 5y ago

The Highway Code is not strictly law. I think OP has editorialised the title sensationally.

iainmerrick 5y ago
Yes, it's not law, and UK drivers (at whom this story is aimed) implicitly know that. The HN title should be changed to the article title.
- Terry_Roll 5y ago
  It is the Law in some situations. So in the Highway Code, if it says Must or Must Not , then its law. Expand the section called "Wording of the Highway Code". https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/introduction https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/introduction Unfortunately despite all the UK Gov website cheer leading on sites like this, I cant provide a link to the expanded section in question!
  - iainmerrick 5y ago
    I would see those parts as just explaining the law, where the law is a separate thing, rather than defining the law. Maybe that’s just splitting hairs, though.
    - Terry_Roll 5y ago
      Its a bit like the ACPO speeding enforcement guidelines https://www.npcc.police.uk/2018%20FOI/Operations/030%2018%20Speed%20Enforcement%20Guidance.pdf https://www.npcc.police.uk/2018%20FOI/Operations/030%2018%20... https://library.college.police.uk/docs/appref/ACPO-Speed-Enforcement-Guidance.pdf https://library.college.police.uk/docs/appref/ACPO-Speed-Enf... Magistrates will take the above as Law, its one of those grey areas of law, so selective application of the law exists, and thats before you even get into a debate of whether you have a say in the laws that you are born under if you havent moved abroad.
    - pmyteh 5y ago

GuB-42 5y ago

I don't understand how it can become law. Are there any other laws that tell you how to do something, as opposed to the end result? Here, the idea is that you shouldn't hit cyclists with your door, and the way to achieve that is to look, and the "Dutch reach" is a good way to do it. Why isn't the law just "if you hit a cyclist with your door because you didn't look, that's your fault" instead of specifying a particular way of looking (which may be a problem if you have mobility issues). The only thing I think may come into law is that it has to be taught in driving schools.

DaedPsyker 5y ago
It's not a law, the highway code does contain legal requirements but it's primary purpose is as a guide, particularly to new drivers.
- zarzavat 5y ago
  Additionally the Highway Code is the “textbook” for the national driving exam. New drivers have to pass a theory test that follows it closely, and may fail the practical test if they don’t follow its guidelines.
bramblerose 5y ago
All the time, especially in low incidence high impact scenarios. You must wear a seat belt ("don't get killed in a crash"), your brake disks must be at least this thick ("you should be able to stop before your brakes fade"), you cannot use a mobile phone while driving ("you must pay attention to what's going on around you"). Concrete requirements are much easier to police, even though they may not reach the intended end goal completely (e.g. distracted driving due to hands free calling).
KarlKemp 5y ago
There are countless examples of similar requirements. The license requirement for driving is, for example, a specific instruction how to do something. The law doesn’t just say “must be capable to safely operate a car”. I bet building codes are specific with regards to materials being used. Rules of the road require you to use turn signals to, well, signal turning, even if you could communicate the same with other means.

iso1631 5y ago

Claimed Headline is wrong, and not what the BBC article says. Actual headline is "Highway Code: 'Dutch reach' rule change to Highway Code welcomed" This is guidance on how to avoid knocking people off their bikes, which remains just as illegal as it used to be. Doesn't matter what method you use to achieve that goal, as long as you achieve it. Is it legal in the US to stretch out your arm in the path of a jogger and knock them flying? How about if you do it with a car door? {current headline on HN is “Dutch reach” car door opening method becomes law in the UK (bbc.com)". I suspect the BBC headline was originally that nonsense but was quickly picked up by a second pair of eyes}

idontwantthis 5y ago
Drivers who injure or kill bicyclists are rarely punished in America so, > Is it legal in the US to stretch out your arm in the path of a [bicyclist] and knock them flying? How about if you do it with a car door? Kind of.
- iso1631 5y ago
  Same in the UK, if you want to kill someone, use a car, even if you do get jailed you'll have a far lower sentence
  - bitwize 5y ago
    One of the side effects of more restrictive gun laws is that in countries with such laws, terrorists reach for slower moving, but much larger caliber and just as deadly, projectile weaponry to commit their mayhem (i.e., motor vehicles).
    - iso1631 5y ago
      Who said anything about terrorists? We had terrorists blowing up the UK from the 70s onwards (and before really) with bombs. Very few events where someone uses a car to kill someone for political purposes though. Someone found guilty of causing death by dangerous driving usually get far lighter sentences than those found guilty of causing death by manslaughter, and the majority of car drivers that cause death don't even get charged

jjp 5y ago

Dutch reach is one of many recommended behavioural changes - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-changes-you-need-to-know-from-29-january-2022 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-change...

frankfrankfrank 5y ago

What a contrived crutch being pushed as some kind of futuristic advancement … as is clearly identified by the pulsing techno melody. This is such a great example of navel gazing, self-congratulatory pontification that is detached from reality. Just look in the mirrors and over your shoulder before opening the door like you are supposed to. If people aren’t doing that already, how is them also not following this additional practice going to improve anything? Short answer, it won’t. Just check your surroundings. No self-important technocratic complication needed.

chrisseaton 5y ago
> Just look in the mirrors and over your shoulder before opening the door That’s literally what they’re encouraging. That’s what the Dutch Reach is - a way to look in your mirrors and over your shoulder.
- frankfrankfrank 5y ago
  You are missing the point. Just do the fundamentals and no other complications are necessary. The problem is likely a far different one, one of people not following the fundamentals, likely because they are not urban drivers or are even foreigners. I check my surroundings before I get out in most parking situations, yet I currently I live in a place where drivers don’t even check both sides when turning at an unregulated intersection as if pedestrians and cyclists simply don’t exist. That being said, ultimately as a cyclist myself, I trust exactly 0 laws to keep me safe and am 100% untrusting off all other vehicles and people. Because reality simply is that I am the squishy human and they are the mechbot driver. Did you notice that not a single person in the video report/demonstration even wore a helmet while racing past cars at unsafe speeds and distances? That weird sense of entitlement of cyclists is something I simply cannot understand. You are responsible for you’re own safety, so slow down and keep a distance like a smart person would.
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    > Just do the fundamentals This is a way to achieve exactly that! > or are even foreigners Oh no not foreigners! Do you think people don't know how to drive in other countries?

jillesvangurp 5y ago

The guidance on this in the Netherlands is actually being relaxed somewhat: https://www.nu.nl/binnenland/6180537/autodeur-met-verste-hand-openen-is-volgens-ministerie-soms-juist-gevaarlijker.html https://www.nu.nl/binnenland/6180537/autodeur-met-verste-han... (in Dutch). The Dutch government actually issues a message earlier this week (probably in response to what the UK is doing) with the updated guidance. Apparently, it's not that safe in some recent cars due to the position of the door handle. So it no longer is something that is checked during driving exams anymore. Nor is it required to be teaching it during driving lessons. And the guidance is to simply pay attention.

yourusername 5y ago
As a Dutch driver i only know about this technique from foreign media. I was never taught to do this during my driving lessons, don't do it and don't know anyone else that opens their door this way.
- lucb1e 5y ago
  Also a Dutch driver: I was taught this (around 2010 this was), but yeah I've never heard of it outside of driving school (until today) and I'm pretty sure it wasn't checked during my exam.
- alamortsubite 5y ago
  I'm an American driver who (obviously) wasn't taught this, either. However, I read about it around the same time a bicycle gutter was painted in front of my house, and it stuck with me. As a result, every time I open my car door I think "Dutch Reach!" and I check my mirror for cyclists (I don't actually open the door with my opposite hand). So even if it's apocryphal, it's a catchy idea and you should take the credit. My full technique also involves popping the door only a few inches and allowing it to sit that way for a couple seconds, then opening it slowly, just to be doubly cautious.
  - frankfrankfrank 5y ago
    I think your technique of keeping the door ajar even just two or three seconds is a better idea than this convoluted Dutch reach. It gives any cyclist information that a door is opening. But as I’ve said, if everyone just uses their mirrors it’s unnecessary because you will know there are no cyclists coming. Another point that is missed is why don’t cyclists ride in the middle of the street and/or slow down a bit. It is always astonishing to me how entitled and utterly recklessly cyclists ride around as if the supposed rights they have are some kind of divine protection. You’re the squishy human that has nothing protecting it, rider like it may kill your, because it can. And did anyone else notice not a single person was wearing a helmet in the video? I’m not one to force people to wear helmets, but there again is that weird entitlement of cyclists. So now people have to do some convoluted reach because cyclists race past car doors without a helmet on. Have you ever seen cyclists in Dutch cities, they are simply stupid risk takers.

aaron695 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

tialaramex 5y ago

Tweaks to make people look the right way are very effective. When I was a child the UK had a lot of Pelican crossings. A Pelican consists of almost normal red/amber/green lamps for motor traffic, plus cross/don't cross indications mounted on the same poles for pedestrians, you press a button, you stare at the red "Don't cross" symbol on the far side of the road, eventually the car signals change to red (stop) then yours change to green (cross) and you can cross the road. Sometimes these are independent, sometimes they're tied into a junction and follow a light sequence for the junction (in which case pressing the button may not appear to actually make any difference, especially at peak times) Today though it has a lot more Puffin crossings. Superficially the Puffin is similar, but the Cross/ Don't Cross indication is physically mounted on your side of the road such that to stare at it you're looking towards oncoming motor traffic (in the UK this often, but not always, means facing right). This means now your awareness of that traffic happens as a natural consequence of checking for the indication it's safe to cross. If some lunatic has ignored the lights and is racing towards you anyway there's a better chance you notice as you see it go green. As well as Pelican, and Puffin, and the widely known Zebra, there are also Toucan ("Two can cross" = bicycles as well as pedestrians) and Pegasus (The Pegasus is a mythical winged horse, these are for horse riders) crossings but the principle of these rarer alternatives is the same as for Puffin.

djbusby 5y ago
Any pictures of these crossing with fun names? E:I found this once Google understood I wasn't searching for birds or weed https://www.tameside.gov.uk/traffic/pedestriancrossings https://www.tameside.gov.uk/traffic/pedestriancrossings And https://namiyousef96.medium.com/zebra-pelican-puffin-and-toucan-the-uks-pedestrian-crossings-46ac17f8e51d https://namiyousef96.medium.com/zebra-pelican-puffin-and-tou... And of course Wikipedia
- MatthewWilkes 5y ago
  A Google image search for each will probably be best. They are relatively technical terms within highways, most people wouldn't be able to describe them as well as the person you replied to, so there aren't all that many good diagrams comparing the types.

donatj 5y ago

Cyclists are supposed to follow the same rules as cars. If a car takes out another cars door, the moving vehicle is at fault. If you are going fast enough within the arc of a door that you don’t have time to slow down, you're going faster than you are able to safely control. You are putting yourself and others in danger. You are a missile on the road, slow down or leave more room... It’s irresponsible to cycle that fast by doorways.

zenexer 5y ago
In reality, bicycles are often trapped between fast-moving traffic and parked cars for the majority of their travel. At the end of the day, the goal here is to save lives, regardless of who would be at fault. Although, from another user’s comment, it sounds like the person opening the car door would be at least partially responsible, and that was already the case: > It is already an offence to open a car door, or cause or permit it to be opened, so as to cause injury, punishable by a maximum fine of £1,000. Furthermore, getting out of a car can be dangerous. This just seems like a sensible habit. There are no disadvantages.
jffry 5y ago
Maybe your jurisdiction has different road rules, but this seems precisely wrong. How can a driver be expected to stop on a dime for a door that opens into a travel lane with zero warning? The responsibility for not thrusting a car door into the path of another vehicle must lie with the only person who is capable of preventing a collision - the person opening the door. Anything else would be a ridiculous policy.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Either traffic participants of all forms are required to avoid causing a higher speed traffic flow to take evasive action or they're not. I don't care if you're jaywalking, opening a car door, incapable of using the skinny pedal in sufficient quantity when entering the street, whatever, don't do it in front of other faster moving shit that will have to take evasive action regardless of what that type of traffic that other shit happens to be. You wanna jump into a traffic flow that you have no business being in on account of your speed, go ahead, but whatever happens after that is on you. A cyclist is no more at fault for hitting a car door extended 0.2sec of distance in front of them than a train is for hitting whatever tried to beat it to the crossing.

dkarl 5y ago

This is an idea that I found incredibly effective. I heard about it once, started doing it, and now I always do it, and I can always see if someone is coming. When I ride my bike, I always try to stay out of the door zone, but sometimes I'm forced over by oncoming traffic in a tight street. Many streets just aren't wide enough to stay a safe distance away from oncoming traffic and also stay out of reach of doors. (Bicycles are smaller than cars, but cars can safely pass much closer to other cars because the risk is lower — some paint and body work versus possible serious injury. Cars typically slow way down when encountering oncoming cars in a tight street, too, making it safer to get close, but they don't do that as often for cyclists. A final factor is that I think subconsciously drivers don't see the door zone as a dangerous place for cyclists, so they think they're giving you more space than they really are. All these factors mean that a street that feels narrow when I'm driving feels just as narrow and tricky, sometimes even more so, when I'm on my bike.) EDIT: Another final thing that makes staying out of the door zone tricky is when there's parking right next to the bike lane! This seems like an utterly brainless design, maybe it's necessary in some places for reasons I don't understand, but it's horrible and the very existence of the bike lane makes drivers aggressive towards cyclists who aren't in it. I just avoid those streets, but when I can't, I ride in the bike lane and hope not to get doored.

iso1631 5y ago
> When I ride my bike, I always try to stay out of the door zone, but sometimes I'm forced over by oncoming traffic in a tight street. Many streets just aren't wide enough to stay a safe distance away from oncoming traffic and also stay out of reach of doors. If you were in a car, what would you do? I admit that it's unlikely that a car driver coming toward you is going to flash you to come forward when they think "there's plenty of space", however you can slow right down and check the parked car occupants to see if they are there. A bigger problem is taxi drivers letting out passengers without checking for traffic, as shown here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI0dPGuP2zE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zI0dPGuP2zE (of course the anti-cyclist brigage will complain that he should have been dressed in high viz and wearing a helmet /s)
- acdha 5y ago

moron4hire 5y ago

My personal habit is to pop the latch for the door so the seal breaks, letting the door move maybe an inch. It's enough to create a very clear line around the door for anyone coming to see that the door is opening. And of course I then always look to see if someone is coming. If we're teaching people in driving school a habit, the "Dutch reach" doesn't actually focus on looking to see if the way is clear. It might incidentally improve how many people look, but why be so passive about it? Just teach people to get in the habit of looking.

Tijdreiziger 5y ago
> If we're teaching people in driving school a habit, the "Dutch reach" doesn't actually focus on looking to see if the way is clear. It might incidentally improve how many people look, but why be so passive about it? Just teach people to get in the habit of looking. AFAIK this is what's actually taught in the Netherlands -- look in the side mirror, over your shoulder through the window, and only then open the door.
jimbob45 5y ago
I do the same thing with the added benefit of being able to hear screaming, sirens, or anything that would alert me to re-close the door.

erwincoumans 5y ago

People opening car doors without looking first, was one of the things that surprised me after moving to California. In the Netherlands, people are much more careful and make sure there is no bycicle crashing into your opened car door. We have many more bikes in the Netherlands of course.

whimsicalism 5y ago
People in SF are just bad at driving in general

Jawriz 5y ago

This is the way.

dncornholio 5y ago

Literally nobody does this. But the Netherlands is the best country in the world when it comes to cycling. The infrastructure is sublime, you are protected physically from most traffic. Some cities have hardly any stoplights and of course all the roads are perfectly flat. Sometimes I fail to realize how good our infra actually is, and what it does to society.

t0mas88 5y ago
Indeed, nobody knows this term or rule. But looking out before opening a car door is definitely a thing. Parents also tell their children to do this.

jwmoz 5y ago

As a motorcyclist I welcome any rules which make drivers more aware. Side note: I live in Taiwan and you wouldn't believe how stupid some of the rules are here, it annoys me everyday as it's needlessly dangerous. Some red lights you can drive over, if they are flashing, I believe. And the worst for me is when pedestrian crossing is on green cars can still drive through it so you get drivers needlessly pushing to go over a green crossing even when pedestrians are crossing.

xnyan 5y ago
I vividly remember visiting NYC for the first time and being shocked that while starting to cross 8th ave and 15th st, that a yellow cab was already making a turn the second I put my foot in the intersection and was slowing creeping towards me. It's probably just the nature of a big city.
- tharne 5y ago
  > I vividly remember visiting NYC for the first time and being shocked that while starting to cross 8th ave and 15th st, that a yellow cab was already making a turn the second I put my foot in the intersection and was slowing creeping towards me. I had the exact same reaction the first time I saw this. I was a teenager at the time and remember actually slamming the hood of a turning cab with my fist on more than one occasion, before realizing that what the cabs were doing was normal and accepted behavior.
- awhitby 5y ago
  At least compared with a few other fairly big cities I've lived in this is a distinctively New York and even Manhattan phenomenon. I drive rarely here but my assumption is that drivers would often never get to turn the corner if they gave crossing pedestrians the polite space they do elsewhere, because of a combination of (foot) traffic density and pedestrians ignoring their light. That last part, I think, is because New York pedestrian lights have a relatively long "red flashing" phase, which combined with New Yorkers being New Yorkers has the counterintuitive effect that everyone treats red flashing, and even the few seconds after, as "go ahead and start crossing."
- 5y ago

habeebtc 5y ago

This is a great commonsense idea which is likely to have a positive impact. However, given the array of things which have been termed "Dutch" in English, does "Dutch Reach" sound naughty to anyone else?

fredley 5y ago
No worse than "Hollywood Handshake"

kiliantics 5y ago

If you drive in an urban environment, please remember to consider other road users (since most road design does not protect people outside of cars). Dooring can be extremely dangerous! Here are a couple examples that illustrate how lethal this simple mindless action could become: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SylGrcN0iTI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SylGrcN0iTI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcTGhlstgQM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcTGhlstgQM And please support traffic calming and safer design of your local streets, as well as increased access to public transit.

mdip 5y ago

As a parent with a child who's learning to drive, I love this idea and I'm teaching it to him. It's funny how many other things like this exist in the driving world. I remember when my parents were teaching me about "backing up", I was told to put my right arm over the back of the passenger seat. This has a similar effect to the "Dutch Reach" in that it forces your body to look completely behind you, covering blind spots in both back corners so that you can see oncoming pedestrians and bike traffic (as well as cross car traffic) on a sidewalk as you cross it.

adhesive_wombat 5y ago

My car has red reflective stripes on the inside of the door edge, so they can be seen from behind as soon as the door is ajar. I put them on myself, since as a cyclist I'd like them on all cars. I don't know why cars don't fit lights and reflectors as standard there. There's always power in modern doors for an LED. At night, that extra second or two of "there's a door opening ahead" could be critical. Only works on bikes with lights, of course. But I'm not very sympathetic to bikes without them.

awhitby 5y ago
My guess is the kind of careless people who don't check for cyclists tend to be the kind that throw their doors wide open in one movement, so while this doesn't hurt, it gives cyclists a split-second's warning at best.
- adhesive_wombat 5y ago
  Certainly, it gives a cyclist a split second if someone opens a door suddenly. That's not what it's really for - nothing can prevent that. For people opening a door sensibly (most people), it gives a unambiguous warning that a door is ajar ahead maybe 5 or 10 seconds before the door opens more. In the dark, where reflectors work, that's a lot more than you might get if you don't notice the door is ajar.
rtheunissen 5y ago
Isn't the problem more the car not seeing the cyclist, than it is the cyclist not seeing the door opening?
- adhesive_wombat 5y ago
  Absolutely it is (I always double check the mirror and crack the door first, even as a passenger) but it's defense in depth, and as a cyclist, if someone's going to open the door anyway, I'd rather be able to see it that assume they've seen me. I have lights, but as a driver, I also know that even the brightest bike lights can by surprising easy to miss. Also, speaking as a cyclist, it can be surprisingly hard to see an opening car door in the dark. The side of the inside of a door is the same colour as the bodywork, so this is not as obvious as you might always expect. It's also not only cyclists who can see this - cars with their light on will see it too, and since I'd quite like my car to continue to have a full set of doors, this is a win for me too. Also, the car carries passengers and is not always driven by me. While obviously, I am completely perfect and am obviously physically incapable of fucking up, I cannot guarantee they will not open their doors badly, so I might as well make an effort to mitigate it in case they do.

tpoacher 5y ago

Personally I'm just waiting for the "all cars are required to have rear cameras which automatically report tailgaters to the police with appropriate fines and point deductions" law. As for the dutch reach, I have a feeling that the most effective way to teach drivers to keep cyclists in mind before doing stupid things, is if you mandated 2 years of compulsory cycling before being allowed to drive a car. ... not that by the same logic, having suffered from tailgaters stops most people from tailgating themselves, but, you know.

sandworm101 5y ago

Is this "rule" a guideline or a law? Is this something they want to teach or are they going to hand out ticket for opening doors with the wrong hand? If this is a guideline, I would suggest that bicyclists (and e-scooters et al) also be instructed to leave distance between themselves and parked vehicles. Motorcyclists have for years been taught to avoid getting so near to parked cars for fear of being "doored". Speeding along only inches from parked cars is dangerous to everyone, especially pedestrians who may be stepping out from between cars.

mimon 5y ago
It is a recommendation only, so you won't be fined, but during court proceedings failing to follow this or other recommendations in the highway code can increase your liability. The government announcement of the changes is here: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-changes-you-need-to-know-from-29-january-2022 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-highway-code-8-change...
- sandworm101 5y ago
  If its not a law, then I'm not sure it will have much impact in realworld cases. Any collision between a bicycle and a car door remains an impact between a moving vehicle on the road and a stationary vehicle (Technically the word is "allision" when a moving object strikes a fixed object). Longstanding presumptions will remain heavily weighted against the moving vehicle. And proving which hand was used would seem difficult even with blanket camera footage. Even if only a guideline, burden will be on the bicycle to prove that the guideline had been broken.
overspeed 5y ago
I ride a bike as my daily driver and have owned and operated motorcycles extensively in the past. Motorcycles should never ride as close to the edge of the road as bikes do. They're faster, bigger and more noticeable. They are given a wider berth compared to bicyclists in my experience since you can take up the middle of the lane without holding up traffic. Riding a bike deeper into (relatively) high speed lanes is more dangerous. Impatient 4+ wheeled beings tend to drive past you putting the bike very close a lot of moving mass.

lamontcg 5y ago

I just check my mirror and crack my door and don't throw it wide open. I don't quite understand the people who need this dutch reach meme to realize that you always need to be careful opening your door into an active traffic lane rather than the hazard being incredibly obvious.

artificialidiot 5y ago

There is a side mirror on the car. Use it.

causality0 5y ago

I was trying to figure out how in the world these accidents happen and then I remembered the poor sods unlucky enough to live where they have to park on the street. Putting bicycles and automobiles on the same road seems like madness in general. I wonder if modern cars with lane-keeping and other such sensor equipment are programmed to check and warn for oncoming cyclists.

anonymou2 5y ago
I must be mad, riding my bicycle daily, on the same roads as cars for more than 15 years. 0 accidents. By the way, the simplest way to avoid a dooring accident is not to ride on the door zone. When I see a bike-only lane next to parked cars I take it as an indication of where not to ride. They make bike-only infrastructure to kick us off the roads anyway, not for safety.

bastawhiz 5y ago

Frustratingly, Tesla cars (or at least the Model 3) make this impossible, as there's no handle to pull that unlatches the door.

patcon 5y ago
For those wondering what this meant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5nLDkIlZcU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5nLDkIlZcU

aitchnyu 5y ago

I have a pet idea for car doors to make the right thing easy, a Poka Yoke. Invert the door handle and cut out 180 degrees and place it abreast of the drivers chest, so the driver will have a tough time using his closer hand, but he can cup his other hand to slide up and open the handle. The door will open a crack, allowing driver to hear stuff, and exposing reflective markings and lights to warn people behind. The handle forces the Dutch reach, and the door design allows warning time even if driver is oblivious.

rsj_hn 5y ago

I think the problem here is that it's very hard to enforce and requires everyone to open car doors in an unintuitive way. What would be better is an automated system, say something that flashed the rear lights and made a sound before the door opened. Then you would have 100% compliance and people could still open doors in the way that they are accustomed to (which will probably happen anyway). This really is a case where a technological solution is superior to a behavioral solution, and this often happens in the realm of safety. E.g. instead of demanding that drivers give proper distance to cyclists, what we really need is a separate grade that enforces a proper distance. One is a poor substitute for the other, and when you are talking about safety, you want the technical solution over trusting that everyone will voluntarily always do the right thing to avoid an accident.

Jeff_Brown 5y ago
Also why we should use statically typed languages.

1nverseMtx 5y ago

Wasn't aware of specific rules around this in the Netherlands and this definitely didn't come up in my drivers exam. The only place I heard about this is foreign media over the past years. However something that does happen in the Netherlands is that kids get taught to pay attention and look around before opening the door of a car, no matter what hand you use. This is something my parents kept insisting over and over. Obviously only anecdotal but I expect this to be the real reason accidents like this are minimal. Combined with having a cycling culture and safer infrastructure where often the cycle lane is separated from parking spaces by some distance to make this impossible.

t0mas88 5y ago
Same here. As far as I know this isn't an official rule of any type in the Netherlands, it's just what people do because we have lots of cyclists. And every kids knows because their parents look before opening a door as well.

supergirl 5y ago

I doubt this is as popular as people thing it is. what's the logic of it? the problem is people forget to check before opening the door right? so the same people will just forget to use this uncomfortable "technique".

ivolimmen 5y ago

Weird. I am Dutch and I am not familiar with this rule. I have been taught to open doors this way and I do but I never knew why.. awesome to read this