Three feet to pass petition

Sundaycyclist

Forgive me if this has already been posted but it's worth our while looking at this Number 10 petition and signing it if you agree with the proposal:

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/3feet2Pass/

nigglenoo

Beat me to it

International campaign here: http://www.3feet2pass.com/

Discussion here: http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=30436

Sundaycyclist

Please reply if you support and sign the petition to keep this one in view. Use your Twitter and Facebook accounts to spread the word. Seen about 100 signatures this morning already.

BentMikey

I'm not sure that 3 feet is enough room. It might be with low speed differential, but at higher speed I want a heck of a lot more room than that.

AndyManc

BentMikey wrote:

I'm not sure that 3 feet is enough room. It might be with low speed differential, but at higher speed I want a heck of a lot more room than that.

Correct , I WONT be signing it, the highway code already states vehicles should give the same amount of room as they do when passing a car and IMO that's around 6ft (2m).

The petition should be scrapped.


.

always_tyred

AndyManc wrote:

BentMikey wrote:

I'm not sure that 3 feet is enough room. It might be with low speed differential, but at higher speed I want a heck of a lot more room than that.

Correct , I WONT be signing it, the highway code already states vehicles should give the same amount of room as they do when passing a car and IMO that's around 6ft (2m).

The petition should be scrapped.

.

I can reach out and touch a car three feet away. This is a really bad petition. It is encouraging a REDUCTION in the amount of room we arsupposed to be given.

I dispair.

Sundaycyclist

The highway code is a guide that motorists ignore. Three feet may not be enough but the petition will raise awareness, which can't be bad.

alfablue

I want a car width, minimum!

Sundaycyclist

What is a car width; exactly? A Heinkel three wheeler is a car as is a Hummer.

alfablue

Sundaycyclist wrote:

The highway code is a guide that motorists ignore. Three feet may not be enough but the petition will raise awareness, which can't be bad.

like motorists are now completely aware of the law against mobile phone use. . . which has had a fantastic impact on behaviour :roll: (in 1/2 hour cycling I usually spot 10+ motorists on their phones).

This pathetic 3 feet nonsense is not the answer. We need to have a cultural change, at the moment there is institutional discrimination against cyclists in the police and judiciary. Some decent enforcement and decent penalties for drivers that harm cyclists would be more likely to have an impact.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Always Tyred wrote:

I dispair.

Is that like ceasing to be in a pair? Cool.


OK. All you lot who want at least three, and possibly at least six feet between you and a passing car:

(a) how close do you ride to the kerb?
(b) how much space do you give to a cyclist you pass?
(c) (if you drive) how much space do you give to car that you're overtaking (assuming you overtake)?

Just askin' ...

alfablue

Sundaycyclist wrote:

What is a car width; exactly? A Heinkel three wheeler is a car as is a Hummer.

I think that if you exclude 3 wheel cars you will be left with a minimum of 5 feet. But hey, if you can't imagine what a car width is, then there is little hope of judging 3 feet.

Sorry to have a downer on your proposal, but its another example of cyclists being soft as s*it rather than properly campaigning for their right to be on the road. Its just SO meek! No wonder we are treated like victimes, we act that way!

Sundaycyclist

Well said (and spelled) Greg66.

The petition is for a "minimum" three foot clearance. As law. Which means a motorist could be prosecuted for passing any closer.

Three feet is fine unless the cyclist is wobbling all over the road, in which case maybe they shouldn't be cycling.

We all know (certainly in London) that we're often passed at a foot or sometimes fewer than twelve inches clearance. I'd be delighted if every vehicle gave me three feet.

Yes the highway code advises more width, but it is not law.

This petition will serve to raise awareness and discussion. Any law that is passed will have to pass through revisions where the true width dictated can be revised.

However, keep bleating on about wanting larger gaps as it keeps this thread at the top.

AndyManc

alfablue wrote:

Sundaycyclist wrote:

, but its another example of cyclists being soft as s*it rather than properly campaigning for their right to be on the road. Its just SO meek! No wonder we are treated like victimes, we act that way!

WRONG , I'm not accepting second rate s hit , 3ft in meaningless garbage , I EXPECT DOUBLE , and I'm NOT MEEK enough to accept anything less.


.

Sundaycyclist

AndyManc - use your words on the petition then - you can still sign it and comment on it being well short of what you "expect". The Government doesn't read Bikerader so saying it here is a waste of ascii characters.

alfablue

Greg66 wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

I dispair.

Is that like ceasing to be in a pair? Cool.


OK. All you lot who want at least three, and possibly at least six feet between you and a passing car:

(a) how close do you ride to the kerb?
(b) how much space do you give to a cyclist you pass?
(c) (if you drive) how much space do you give to car that you're overtaking (assuming you overtake)?

Just askin' ...

a) Usually 1 metre, more in narrow roads
b) maybe 3ft :shock:
c) Usually cross the central line (usually with both sides of the car), always a "car" width.

On Tuesday I sat behind a cyclist for half a mile on a road with double solid lines in the middle. I had just seen every car in front break the law overtaking and crossing the lines. Unfortunately (but not to excuse the drivers), the cyclist was kerb hugging as if to encourage passing. The last of these cars I was following nearly had a head on going around the bend, cut in madly and just missed the cyclist!!! I had quite a queue building up behind me, but hopefully there might be some effect from modelling appropriate driving behaviour - so as your post suggests, we need to get our own house in order first!

always_tyred

Sundaycyclist wrote:

The highway code is a guide that motorists ignore. Three feet may not be enough but the petition will raise awareness, which can't be bad.

It is terrible. It will make motorists believe that 3 feet is okay. It isn't.

Sundaycyclist

Given that motorists believe that six inches is OK now then what do you expect to do? Three feet is fine. Six feet, three feet, both are clear space and won't touch you. AND, it's a mimimum being suggested. The big thing here is not the gap but the fact that what is being asked for is a LAW! Somehting we don't have at all at the moment.

I'm off now. I'll leave it to everyone else to froth over the thing without giving it thought.

whyamihere

3 feet isn't fine. If I have to swerve right for some reason (pothole I've not spotted, pedestrian stepping out oblivious to all around them etc) and a car's passing me a metre away, that swerve is going to put me right into the danger zone. 3 feet also allows overtaking while going through those little lane dividers for pedestrians to cross halfway to, which is clearly a very bad thing.

Don't campaign for less than we're entitled to. Doing so is stupid.

always_tyred

Sundaycyclist wrote:

Given that motorists believe that six inches is OK now then what do you expect to do? Three feet is fine. Six feet, three feet, both are clear space and won't touch you. AND, it's a mimimum being suggested. The big thing here is not the gap but the fact that what is being asked for is a LAW! Somehting we don't have at all at the moment.

I'm off now. I'll leave it to everyone else to froth over the thing without giving it thought.

Well, what a daft argument. Anything >0 is not touching, so what are you fussed about?

Your handlebars are about 18 inches wide, perhaps 2 feet if you have flat bars.

You are therefore claiming that drivers come within 1/3 or 1/4 of the width of your bars from you. Very occasionally this will happen, but if it was a regular occurrence, then simply getting brushed from your bike would also be a weekly occurrence because neither your road positioning, nor drivers' ability is accurate to these distances.

My point is that 3 feet is bloody close. A lot of the incidents that you think are "inches" are, in fact, "feet". Thus, leading motorists to believe that "feet" is acceptable, where as "metres" are required, is simply dangerous.

You are simply signing a petition allowing motorists to do what they do already. Since you acknowledge that motorists pass too close, you are shooting yourself in the foot as a result of not having looked at a tape measure recently.

always_tyred

Greg66 wrote:

Always Tyred wrote:

I dispair.

Is that like ceasing to be in a pair? Cool.

That's great Greg. Thanks for your contribution to the debate.

alfablue

AndyManc wrote:

alfablue wrote:

Sundaycyclist wrote:

, but its another example of cyclists being soft as s*it rather than properly campaigning for their right to be on the road. Its just SO meek! No wonder we are treated like victimes, we act that way!

WRONG , I'm not accepting second rate s hit , 3ft in meaningless garbage , I EXPECT DOUBLE , and I'm NOT MEEK enough to accept anything less.


.

GOOD! Bloody right. Cyclists stand up and be counted!!!!!

nwallace

alfablue wrote:

On Tuesday I sat behind a cyclist for half a mile on a road with double solid lines in the middle. I had just seen every car in front break the law overtaking and crossing the lines.

How fast was the cyclist going?

You can cross double white lines if it is to allow you to overtake a Road Roller, Cyclist or Horse travelling at less than 10mph

Also Double white does not mean no overtaking, it means do not cross unless one of the clauses applies, a single white you can never cross (that possible even includes under instruction of police)

The only way of prohibiting overtaking is to plant a sign with that meaning.

BentMikey wrote:

I'm not sure that 3 feet is enough room. It might be with low speed differential, but at higher speed I want a heck of a lot more room than that.

I agree, the principle is sound but the distance given is wrong. There needs to be a distance below which Inconsiderate or Careless driving is confirmed. (This may also require that cycles must give the space as well)

I signed it because I thought the system allowed you to add a comment.

Someone could put up a petition to have the highway code rule made compulsory.

alfablue

He was on a Spesh Tarmac doing a steady 20mph, speed limit for the road 50mph.

nigglenoo

If 3' was mandatory and there was a reasonable chance of being caught and prosecuted then most motorists would give you 5' or 6' just to be sure. As it is there is no actual law at all and if passed a 3' law would at least put something on the statute books to help prosecute drivers involved in an accident, but it would not make the slightest difference to general driving practice if motorists did not feel vulnerable to prosecution, in just the same way as the law about mobile phones has had virtually no effect.

Mithras

www.3feetplease.com/

A similar site....fantastic cycle tops too!

jobysp

I've signed and tweeted - would rather motor cars where taken off the road completely, but I don't think I'd ever get that passed through government.

After the near miss I had with a boy racer giving me no more than 3inches whilst he was doing 55mph in a bus lane, I'll sign anything

downfader

jobysp wrote:

I've signed and tweeted - would rather motor cars where taken off the road completely, but I don't think I'd ever get that passed through government.

After the near miss I had with a boy racer giving me no more than 3inches whilst he was doing 55mph in a bus lane, I'll sign anything

We'll never lose the cars tbh. Even if the oil ran out tomorrow they'd find a way of fueling them, too much has been invested in them to abandon.

I dont think 3 feet is enough myself. Its certainly not enough with HGVs and the air drag they kick up at 30-40mph. I think we also have to bear in mind that when a two wheeler is off'd by deisel their legs/bike may flay out further than the 3 feet. This is the reason for the HC stating "as much room as a car"

I think we can all do our bit for safety by writing the letters and talking to people.

owenlars

What's the point in trying to pass an unenforceable law?

There is no way anyone will be able to convince a court that three feet (or indeed six feet) was either maintained or breached, let alone who's fault it was. Pointless exercise in my opinion.

We would do better eduacting cyclist to ride correctly and motorists to treat cyclists like they do in France.

Better road surfaces and the type of drains that continuously drain into kerbs rather than gulleys with metal gratings, every 100 metres would also help.

nielsamd

owenlars wrote:

What's the point in trying to pass an unenforceable law?....

We would do better eduacting cyclist to ride correctly and motorists to treat cyclists like they do in France.

I haven't made up my mind whether to sign, but as a point of info to the above, I believe it is the law in France... not sure the distance or if it is enforced, but perhaps that plays some part in how drivers apparently treat cyclists better. It can't be because of much recent cycling sporting success .

downfader

nielsamd wrote:

owenlars wrote:

What's the point in trying to pass an unenforceable law?....

We would do better eduacting cyclist to ride correctly and motorists to treat cyclists like they do in France.

I haven't made up my mind whether to sign, but as a point of info to the above, I believe it is the law in France... not sure the distance or if it is enforced, but perhaps that plays some part in how drivers apparently treat cyclists better. It can't be because of much recent cycling sporting success .

I think its a law of 1.5m though. It was on the Angles des Morte video or whatever it was called (you can see it on youtube)

I agree though - we need more police resources dedicated to stuff like this, more bobbies and better punishment for bad road users.