3 ms·
", but". That's because that highway code was designed for huge and heavy cars that need lots of time and space to come to a stop and that pose a danger for ot
by unglaublich 5y ago
", but".
That's because that highway code was designed for huge and heavy cars that need lots of time and space to come to a stop and that pose a danger for other road users.
Not for agile and light cyclists. The rules just do not make a lot of sense for cyclists.
E.g., in the Netherlands there are traffic lights for cyclists. They turn green for all 4 directions simultaneously, for only a few seconds. That's enough to have tens, sometimes hundreds of cyclists cross a road, WITHOUT any collision or danger.
Cars are just too big and heavy for most urban areas. They belong on _highways_ indeed.
- maffydub 5y agoI'd be happy with the Highway Code being updated, or with other provision being made for cyclists, but it sounds like you're suggesting cyclists should just ignore the rules? The trouble with that is that by not following the rules, it's harder for other road users (in particular pedestrians) to predict what they're going to do. Even though bikes are much lighter than cars, I'd prefer not to be hot by either!