On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 22:57:53 +0100, %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth)
wrote:

>Tom Crispin <kije.remove@this.bit.freeuk.com.munge> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:40:21 +0100, JNugent  wrote:
>> 
>> >You would never expect all of the parked cars in a row next to the kerb
>> >to sprout drivers, have their engines turned on and to move off one 
>> >after the other, all within a few seconds.
>> >
>> >Well, no-one normal would.
>> 
>> 20% of deaths and serious injuries among London's cyclists are by a
>> driver or passenger opening their car door into the path of a cyclist.
>
>And by cyclists riding too close and not paying proper attention.
>
>If I'm driving a car and someone opens a door and I drive into it, the
>accident is my fault, not the fault of the person opening the door.
>Quite why cyclists believe that the responsibility should go the other
>way is beyond me.

Because in the large majority of cases, it *is* mainly the fault of
the person opening the door.

If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
into the path of another road user.

No other vehicle is expected to pass with *more* than the space taken
by an open door (which is usually around 1metr). It would rarely be
safe to be that far out into the road.
-- 
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Is "tired old cliche" one?
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Alex Heney  wrote in 
news:blg274dn5u835jfn4s7uhfvhpb5p5fpds9@4ax.com:

> 
> If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
> vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
> into the path of another road user.

Road user includes pedestrians old bean, passengers can also be stuck on 
for this offence for giving someone a ding (and quite rightly so in my 
never humble opinion).

-- 

Regards,

Periander

Periander wrote:
> Alex Heney  wrote in 
> news:blg274dn5u835jfn4s7uhfvhpb5p5fpds9@4ax.com:
> 
>> If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
>> vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
>> into the path of another road user.
> 
> Road user includes pedestrians old bean, passengers can also be stuck on 
> for this offence for giving someone a ding (and quite rightly so in my 
> never humble opinion).
> 
Believe it or not, I've indicated and stopped at a rural bus stop (no 
pavements) - only to have someone on a bicycle come up and overtake on 
the *inside*. Fortunately I did see him and kept the passenger door 
shut, until they had passed.

It is a great shame that cyclists do have to share the road with other 
road users. But...

--
Sue

Palindrome  wrote in news:WIbck.160783$3p2.31721
@fe10.news.easynews.com:

> Believe it or not, I've indicated and stopped at a rural bus stop (no 
> pavements) - only to have someone on a bicycle come up and overtake on 
> the *inside*. Fortunately I did see him and kept the passenger door 
> shut, until they had passed.

Oh dear, when I am compelled to walk that's exactly the kind of cyclist I 
love to meet. Did I ever mention the time in St Johns Wood when various 
car, van, lorry and bus drivers wished to stand witness to the fact that a 
cyclist had hit me when he jumped a red? I wasn't hurt ... :-)

-- 

Regards,

Periander

Palindrome wrote:
> Periander wrote:
>> Alex Heney  wrote in 
>> news:blg274dn5u835jfn4s7uhfvhpb5p5fpds9@4ax.com:
>>
>>> If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
>>> vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
>>> into the path of another road user.
>>
>> Road user includes pedestrians old bean, passengers can also be stuck 
>> on for this offence for giving someone a ding (and quite rightly so in 
>> my never humble opinion).
>>
> Believe it or not, I've indicated and stopped at a rural bus stop (no 
> pavements) - only to have someone on a bicycle come up and overtake on 
> the *inside*. Fortunately I did see him and kept the passenger door 
> shut, until they had passed.

I have had buses overtake and then pull in and brake when they are a few 
feet in front of me cause me to do an emergency stop. I have also had 
bus drivers pull up beside me in the same lane as me, then pull over 
with me beside them, on many occasions.

No doubt the bus drivers here in the second instance complained that I 
tried to undertake.

> It is a great shame that cyclists do have to share the road with other 
> road users. But...

It is a great shame that there are so many idiots on the road, be they 
cyclists, car drivers or even bus drivers.

On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:16:28 GMT, Periander 
wrote:

>Alex Heney  wrote in 
>news:blg274dn5u835jfn4s7uhfvhpb5p5fpds9@4ax.com:
>
>> 
>> If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
>> vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
>> into the path of another road user.
>
>Road user includes pedestrians old bean, passengers can also be stuck on 
>for this offence for giving someone a ding (and quite rightly so in my 
>never humble opinion).

Good point.

It is *less* likely that there will be a pedestrian just about to pass
who cannot avoid the door you open in front of them, but you certainly
still need to be careful there isn't, agreed.
-- 
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Laughing stock: cattle with a sense of humour.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Alex Heney wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:16:28 GMT, Periander 
> wrote:
> 
>> Alex Heney  wrote in 
>> news:blg274dn5u835jfn4s7uhfvhpb5p5fpds9@4ax.com:
>>
>>> If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
>>> vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
>>> into the path of another road user.
>> Road user includes pedestrians old bean, passengers can also be stuck on 
>> for this offence for giving someone a ding (and quite rightly so in my 
>> never humble opinion).
> 
> Good point.
> 
> It is *less* likely that there will be a pedestrian just about to pass
> who cannot avoid the door you open in front of them, but you certainly
> still need to be careful there isn't, agreed.

A passenger may be on the "road" side of the vehicle - even nearside 
passengers in a one-way street.

On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:59:27 +0100, JNugent  wrote:

>Alex Heney wrote:
>> On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:16:28 GMT, Periander 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Alex Heney  wrote in 
>>> news:blg274dn5u835jfn4s7uhfvhpb5p5fpds9@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
>>>> vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
>>>> into the path of another road user.
>>> Road user includes pedestrians old bean, passengers can also be stuck on 
>>> for this offence for giving someone a ding (and quite rightly so in my 
>>> never humble opinion).
>> 
>> Good point.
>> 
>> It is *less* likely that there will be a pedestrian just about to pass
>> who cannot avoid the door you open in front of them, but you certainly
>> still need to be careful there isn't, agreed.
>
>A passenger may be on the "road" side of the vehicle - even nearside 
>passengers in a one-way street.

Of course.

Your point?
-- 
Alex Heney, Global Villager
The best defense against logic is stupidity.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Alex Heney wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:59:27 +0100, JNugent  wrote:
> 
>> Alex Heney wrote:
>>> On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:16:28 GMT, Periander 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alex Heney  wrote in 
>>>> news:blg274dn5u835jfn4s7uhfvhpb5p5fpds9@4ax.com:
>>>>
>>>>> If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
>>>>> vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
>>>>> into the path of another road user.
>>>> Road user includes pedestrians old bean, passengers can also be stuck on 
>>>> for this offence for giving someone a ding (and quite rightly so in my 
>>>> never humble opinion).
>>> Good point.
>>>
>>> It is *less* likely that there will be a pedestrian just about to pass
>>> who cannot avoid the door you open in front of them, but you certainly
>>> still need to be careful there isn't, agreed.
>> A passenger may be on the "road" side of the vehicle - even nearside 
>> passengers in a one-way street.
> 
> Of course.
> 
> Your point?

That car passengers may not only endanger pedestrians when opening car 
doors?

On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 22:31:59 +0100, JNugent  wrote:

>Alex Heney wrote:
>> On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:59:27 +0100, JNugent  wrote:
>> 
>>> Alex Heney wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:16:28 GMT, Periander 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Alex Heney  wrote in 
>>>>> news:blg274dn5u835jfn4s7uhfvhpb5p5fpds9@4ax.com:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
>>>>>> vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
>>>>>> into the path of another road user.
>>>>> Road user includes pedestrians old bean, passengers can also be stuck on 
>>>>> for this offence for giving someone a ding (and quite rightly so in my 
>>>>> never humble opinion).
>>>> Good point.
>>>>
>>>> It is *less* likely that there will be a pedestrian just about to pass
>>>> who cannot avoid the door you open in front of them, but you certainly
>>>> still need to be careful there isn't, agreed.
>>> A passenger may be on the "road" side of the vehicle - even nearside 
>>> passengers in a one-way street.
>> 
>> Of course.
>> 
>> Your point?
>
>That car passengers may not only endanger pedestrians when opening car 
>doors?

I'm sorry, but I don't understand why you think that was a point that
needed making.

Had anybody suggested that might be the case?
-- 
Alex Heney, Global Villager
Let's organize this thing and take all the fun out of it.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom

Alex Heney wrote:

> JNugent  wrote:
>> Alex Heney wrote:
>>> JNugent  wrote:
>>>> Alex Heney wrote:
>>>>> Periander  wrote:
>>>>>> Alex Heney  wrote:

>>>>>>> If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
>>>>>>> vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
>>>>>>> into the path of another road user.

>>>>>> Road user includes pedestrians old bean, passengers can also be stuck on 
>>>>>> for this offence for giving someone a ding (and quite rightly so in my 
>>>>>> never humble opinion).

>>>>> Good point.
>>>>> It is *less* likely that there will be a pedestrian just about to pass
>>>>> who cannot avoid the door you open in front of them, but you certainly
>>>>> still need to be careful there isn't, agreed.

>>>> A passenger may be on the "road" side of the vehicle - even nearside 
>>>> passengers in a one-way street.

>>> Of course.
>>> Your point?

>> That car passengers may not only endanger pedestrians when opening car 
>> doors?

> I'm sorry, but I don't understand why you think that was a point that
> needed making.

> Had anybody suggested that might be the case?

Yes - you did. You might not have seen that implication in what you 
wrote, but it's there.

On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 08:28:32 +0100, JNugent  wrote:

>Alex Heney wrote:
>
>> JNugent  wrote:
>>> Alex Heney wrote:
>>>> JNugent  wrote:
>>>>> Alex Heney wrote:
>>>>>> Periander  wrote:
>>>>>>> Alex Heney  wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> If you are opening a vehicle door on the "traffic" side of the parked
>>>>>>>> vehicle, it is your responsibility to make sure you are not opening it
>>>>>>>> into the path of another road user.
>
>>>>>>> Road user includes pedestrians old bean, passengers can also be stuck on 
>>>>>>> for this offence for giving someone a ding (and quite rightly so in my 
>>>>>>> never humble opinion).
>
>>>>>> Good point.
>>>>>> It is *less* likely that there will be a pedestrian just about to pass
>>>>>> who cannot avoid the door you open in front of them, but you certainly
>>>>>> still need to be careful there isn't, agreed.
>
>>>>> A passenger may be on the "road" side of the vehicle - even nearside 
>>>>> passengers in a one-way street.
>
>>>> Of course.
>>>> Your point?
>
>>> That car passengers may not only endanger pedestrians when opening car 
>>> doors?
>
>> I'm sorry, but I don't understand why you think that was a point that
>> needed making.
>
>> Had anybody suggested that might be the case?
>
>Yes - you did. You might not have seen that implication in what you 
>wrote, but it's there.

No it isn't.

It is *just about* possible, by seriously stretching to suggest that
the post I replied to might *just* have implied that. But only if you
really want to be silly about it.
-- 
Alex Heney, Global Villager
People who live in stone houses shouldn't throw glasses.
To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom