They were actually breaking the law in my interpretation. The highway code has has rules but also the “musts” and “must nots” refer to things in the Road Traffic Act which I’m pretty sure is what the police would use in any prosecution. So while the code advises you can ride 2 abreast, that is not a law but the code clearly states “ride in a dangerous, careless or inconsiderate manner” which is covered by the RTA. I’m pretty sure the 1.5m for overtaking is a guide that also applies to overtaking cars.
The one thing everyone that’s contributed to this interesting thread appears to have missed is that bicyclists are unidentifiable, so however they behave they’re pretty much untouchable.
This, along with the ridiculous changes to the Highway Code has led to the increase in selfish behaviour by a few of them, (often of the ‘snowflake’ generation) who appear to think they have a god given right to bring roads to a standstill in pursuit of their own agenda.
As for ‘head down, ■■■ up’ and being ‘in the zone’, surely you shouldn’t be on the road unless you have a good awareness of your surroundings, which obviously some don’t.
Insurance, a registration system, and some form of easily seen ID for riders imho.
1 Like
It’s getting heated up now though, didn’t think it would stay mostly calm on this subject.
Actually it’s the upteen time this has been discussed over the years I’ve been a member.
I get on with most road users, there’s always one, or two that will spoil your day though, that’s life in general too.
4 Likes
I totally agree.
I don’t defend the lycra-clad brigade in any way when they are behaving irresponsible. But they are not all like that.
You always get the ‘older’ car driver, who is totally oblivious to the world around their vehicle, driving at 30mph in a 60mph zone with no passing places.
We are not all like that………
2 Likes
Anyway.
It’s nearly the weekend.
Fill up, ignore the price
Drop the hood
Find coffee and cake somewhere really expensive.
Have a great weekend all.
Could be worse.
Could be Lysychansk 
7 Likes
Inevitable!
1 Like
Im on it!!
3 Likes
My Trabant caused much consternation to the cycling community 
3 Likes
Good LAD. Star!
2 Likes
At work we say about Friday, that it’s POETS day.
P**s Off Early, Tomorrow’s Saturday……
It has been based on a number of parameters over the years, at the moment it’s based on CO2 output, in the past it has been based on nominal engine power, in the future with electric vehicles it coulee based on something else. Depends on the Govt view and what seems convenient at the time.
So you agree that at the moment it is based on pollution produced? If so how would you translate that to charging cyclists? And also if you are charging cyclists to use the roads, how much do you charge pedestrians to use it? seems like a ridiculous argument to me but you are of course entitled to think it.
It could go on and on.
The village where I live, the farmer drives his cattle down the road twice a day from the fields to his milking parlour.
Not sure if you can charge one of the biggest Methane producers in the world for that!
2 Likes
Now you are just pulling the udder one you silly teat.
3 Likes
You’re just milking this now.
It must be pasture bed time…
2 Likes
Moove along 
1 Like
I never mentioned extending Vehicle excise duty to anything other than motor vehicles. The use of the term “Road tax “ merely confuses the issue. VED has been calculated on a number of parameters over the years and will no doubt continue to evolve from the current vehicle emission one. In the very early days of emission compliance which started in the USA with the EPA, CO2 was never mentioned, they were more concerned with Smog and air quality, and used Hydrocarbons, Carbon Monoxide, NOx and Formaldehyde as the measures. Things changed with the advent of Global Warming hence the concentration on CO2 as a convenient and easily measurable emission. However the vehicle manufacturers are not slow to react and the advent of Hybrid vehicles which in some cases can provide zero CO2 emissions for a short period of time or fitting a smaller, lower CO2, engine in a large vehicle can for a time circumvent the regulations. With the ban on ICE vehicles in the near future then VED will no doubt evolve to take account of these changes to maintain Treasury revenue at current or maybe higher levels.
Finally, the WHO does not categorise CO2 as a pollutant, presumably as it is essential to life and is what keeps our green plants going.
Lozing the will now
Losing
Not sure what you are arguing about then? If you don’t think it should be applied to anyone else why pedantic about what it’s called?