What I would like to know is: Why do some laws in certain areas permit this kind of bicycle riding? I think there should be a stiff penalty for doing what he is doing.

As the OP, I used this photo and story as an example, my point being that I often come across cyclists that seem to take up a lot more road than they need, my point being, if we do that on our cycles then we are causing others to maneuver around us, a gentle arc around a cyclist that is not hogging the road is way safer that a full on overtake.

I'm sure the UK police will find the driver, they normally do when vids go viral. And for that he/she will probably lose their license...

I live and cycle in South East Asia, the roads are chaotic, to say the least, and sports/hobby cyclists tend to ride in pelatons or three abreast chatting to each other... and often causing traffic tailbacks... and therein causing other road users to take on quite dangerous overtaking maneuvers.

Thanks for all the reply's.

As many cyclist here and even some police departments know, you are wrong on these claims. It is more dangerous when motorist try to squeeze by cyclist rather than passing cyclist as if they were a car.

He was in front of the van for about 6 seconds of the video. The van went around and could have done so safely once the no passing zone ended.

Why are they both on the wrong side of the double white line to begin with? No sympathy for either of them.

It's England; it's easier for them to be consistently incompetent than to get them all to figure out the other side is called "the right side" for a reason.

The lane in the video does not appear to be wide enough to safely share with a motor vehicle, especially one as wide as that service van. The cyclist is not only doing the right thing for his safety by holding the lane until it is safe for the motorist to pass, he is also doing a service for all cyclists by training motorists that they sometimes may need to wait behind a cyclist for a few seconds. Which OMG, we all know is such a horrible thing when one is motoring. /sarcasm

All the riders riding/moving far right (left in this case) when it is not safe to share the lane are the ones doing a disservice to all, as they are teaching motorists that they should never ever have to wait behind a cyclist, even when passing may put the cyclist or others at great risk.

Going by the video, I have to disagree. In my opinion, the lane is far too narrow to safely share with an automobile.

Unfortunately, I'm conditioned to ride to the far right (in England/Japan/etc., that would be to the far left), and this frequently puts me in harm's way. My experience is that riding "politely" results in drivers squeezing by when they should not, which endangers me, them, and oncoming traffic. If I were paying proper attention, I would have chosen a lane position very similar to the position that the rider in the video chose.

It is upsetting that riding like this exposes one to anger due to attribution - since drivers may not understand why we chose the lane position that we did, they sometimes attribute our actions to various negative motivations (such as: exaggerated self-importance; a passive-aggressive attempt to impede drivers; stupidity; etc.). However, it would be even more upsetting to be injured or killed because an overtaking driver lacked the judgement to make a safe pass. My experience is that the odds of a safe pass are increased when, in situations similar to those shown in the video, I occupy the lane. There is always the chance that a driver could be (momentarily?) insane and deliberately run me over/run me off the road, but the number of such drivers is dwarfed by the number of drivers who are not malicious but who simply fail to use proper judgement when overtaking.

When I'm riding in a manner similar to that of the rider in the video, I'm just trying to enjoy a ride legally and with due regard to the safety and convenience of all road users. It does not give me some sort of thrill to upset motorists. Given the choice, I'd gladly ride on a nice, wide road with room for drivers to safely pass within the lane that I'm occupying. Such roads are few and far between, however, even in the U.S., and roads such as that are usually high-speed roads where the differential in speed between motorized vehicles and bicycles makes them dangerous for cycling.


------------

Well said.


But this is A&S, and as you can see, someone has to blame the cyclist.

I ensure my safety by no longer cycling on roads like that one. I guess a meteorite could still hit me where I ride, but not a motor vehicle - so my safety is still not 100% assured, but outside of a cosmic disaster I am certainly enhancing my safety by limiting my encounters with motor vehicles on narrow, busy roads.

Bicycles should come with a terms of service "Agree" button. "Cycling in proximity to motor vehicles is potentially dangerous and even life threatening. I accept personal responsibility for my actions. To continue, press AGREE."

Yes, the cyclist has free choice. He is partly to blame for increasing the danger in his life but does have a right to expect other road users won't try to intentionally kill him or endanger him through impatient neglect. HOWEVER...he should EXPECT bad things to occasionally happen out there before making his decision to ride on any roadway. Then - not cry about it when things go south.

Sure, bad things happen... but when the other road users don't even bother to try to do the right thing... and you yourself are only limited to that which an ordinary human can do (I ain't no superman), one has to admit the other road users can sure do a lot more to reduce roadway deaths. Put down the damn ****** and drive.

****** (any freaking distraction that a motorist CHOOSES to attend to, rather than driving.)

It is so interesting watching the radical change of JoeyBike's riding where he once would ride in the oncoming lane to squeeze by slow traffic to the right and oncoming traffic on the left TO now, where he will not even ride on 'that kind of road'.

Just wondering: does "cry(ing) about it when things go south" include:

• attempting to have drivers who deliberately hit cyclists with their vehicles apprehended and prosecuted?
• attempting to have drivers who negligently hit cyclists with their vehicles apprehended and prosecuted?
• attempting to have drivers who assault cyclists with their vehicles apprehended and prosecuted?
• attempting to have drivers who otherwise violate motor vehicle codes (e.g. failing to yield right-of-way to cyclists; passing too closely {where laws exist**, etc.) fined?

If no, can you elaborate on what you mean by "cry(ing) about it"?

Note 1: it is understood that cyclists are just as responsible for following the laws as motorists, and are subject to enforcement when they violate the laws.
Note 2: it is understood that "accidents" exist - blame cannot be assigned for every automobile-cycle crash. For example: animal darts in front of cyclist causing him to swerve into path of auto. "Auto must pass with enough room to account for the unexpected." No. "Cyclist must instantaneously make correct choice as to whether to swerve or hit animal". No. This is an accident.

(Notes added to reduce the risk of straw-man arguments.)


--------------

Agreed, it has been quite an interesting change of behavior on Joeys part!

I do agree with his "Agree Button" idea though. As a cyclist I accept full responsibility for my safety, and do not leave it in the hands of others, especially motorists. This does not mean I need to fear riding among, along side, or even directly in front of them though.

Full attention to the task at hand, constantly monitor all area's, maintain a buffer and an escape.

^^This is possible in a city grid where a decent cyclist can stay mostly ahead of traffic. Out on the open road, no matter where a cyclist positions themselves, the cyclist is completely at the mercy of the motorist overtaking from the rear. Pretty much anyway. I have ditched a couple of times thanks to my helmet mounted mirror - which is part of CONSTANTLY MONITOR ALL AREAS while cycling. I assure you, from what I witness every day, many cyclists ride along "fat, happy, and stupid" simply reacting to their immediate surroundings and paying attention to nothing.

I remember getting "stuck" on a narrow road in Charlottesville, VA at evening rush hour on a fully loaded touring bike. It was a narrow, 2-lane, uphill road with poor sight lines and fast, steady traffic then piling up behind me. I pulled over onto a grassy area 10 feet off the road and took a 1-hour nap. After the nap most of the rush had cleared and the road was beautiful for the next 2 miles to my friend's house.

Sometimes, being a safe cyclist means GETTING THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY. IMO anyway. Opinions may vary. I keep the same mentality cycling in a dense city grid at home. If I feel like I am "in the way" of speeding traffic, then I am doing something very wrong.

Just keep in mind that as a cyclist, you really are not the one "in the way" for most traffic issues... you are merely an "inconvenience for the moment." As soon as that irate motorist passes you, they have hordes and hordes of rolling metal boxes on the road in front of them causing the very crush those motorists hate so much.

Cyclists, by their nature are narrow, and take up very little room on the road. On the other hand, a car with only one occupant, takes up a lot of room on the road... and thus is really "part of the problem."

As I mentioned earlier, there are a lot of things about the video above that makes it appear to be a fake, from maintaining an excellent camera angle on the rider & van to the rider reaching out towards the van before being cut off.

Perhaps part of the discrepancy with views is that I'd have no problems with a normal sized vehicle (5 to 6 1/2 feet wide) passing me in my lane on that road at say 20 to 25 mph vehicle speed.

However, once one allows a reasonable pass, then one starts getting those that choose to pass at 60 MPH while driving 8' 6" semi trucks & trailers. And while I'm pretty good at maintaining my line, they scare the bejesus out of me. I still maintain my line on the road

But, I don't want to be in front of the semi that is slow reacting to a bike directly in front of it.

I guess I just don't have such a far reaching train of thought when out on the road. I simply do what I feel is best at a given moment for my safety and those around me. When other road users are doing the right thing and being respectful, I have no problem making it easier to get around me.
Fixing the world is too big of a job for me, I don't need the hassle. Give a little, take a little, and find an equilibrium with the world as it actually exists rather than trying to make it how I think it should be.

Some might not agree, but it has kept me safe and sane.

Maybe a pool-noodle protruding laterally into traffic isn't such a bad idea.

Might cushion an impact?

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.thestar.com/amp/news/gta/2016/10/18/cyclist-says-his-pool-noodle-makes-toronto-streets-safer-for-him.html

https://www.google.ca/amp/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4046283

Personally, I think I'm safer when drivers move to the other lane to pass.

Hmmm maybe not such a bad idea...

On the other hand, having that limp thing hanging out like that...

A pool noodle shaped like a giant key might encourage drivers of shiny new cars to give us plenty of room to avoid keying their paint.

I have really big "bags" instead of a limp noodle.......