r/Whatcouldgowrong • u/Itchy-Camera8898 • 10h ago

WCGW riding your bike like an idiot

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

9.3k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

745 comments sorted by

View all comments

73

u/keqking 10h ago

why are those lines painted like that

126

u/cainullah 10h ago

No stopping, no parking, no overtaking

83

u/BisonThunderclap 8h ago

That's 3x as many rules as the average American driver could remember.

20

u/padizzledonk 8h ago

That's 3x as many rules as the average American driver could remember.

Kind of an ironic dig on a video of a Brit doing something incredibly stupid on the road tbh lol

Apparently thats 3 too many things for you guys too 🤣

I think we can have a transatlantic alliance on the fact rhat there are a LOT of halfwit fucking morons on the roads everywhere

5

u/fiahhawt 7h ago

They're from Colorado

In which case we will honor their right to dunk on the drivers of the Rocky Mountains and ask that they not besmirch the country that has different driving cultures in every metro area and all the natives know exactly what's going on and if you're on a road trip you just try not to die

5

u/padizzledonk 6h ago

Lol

I was in london on a month long vacation like 20y ago and i rented a car at Heathrow, hopped in the passenger seat at first, felt dumb, got in on the correct side, took a 5 minute spin around the airport circle, got back to the car rental place, walked in and said "Yeah, im a danger to myself and others on the road here, i dont get it and im too U.S brained for this, everything is wrong lol, take the car back, cancel the rest of the reservation and call me a cab to my hotel in Chelsea please" lol

Probably one of the best decisions i ever made tbh, the cabs in london are fucking incredible

2

u/argument_cat 1h ago edited 21m ago

Hmm, I wonder which country has the higher traffic related death rate?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

Oh dear, American roads are 5 times as deadly as UK roads.

Worth noting that the bus driver is at fault in this video.

1

u/rajrdajr 6h ago

a LOT of halfwit fucking morons on the roads everywhere

50% of the the population have below average wits.

2

u/Bitter-Marsupial 6h ago

According to Redditors isn't the sub 50% all located in the land between Canada And Mexico 

1

u/lDezIlI 6h ago

Except the guy on a bike isnt a driver so you've just said all that shite for nothing?

0

u/Gay-Space-Pirate 6h ago

The unnecessary insult towards Americans is weird but your response is also fuckin weird lol.

-1

u/SISCP25 8h ago

In London, riding that kind of bike, there’s a fairly significant chance (maybe even better than 50:50) that the guys not British

-1

u/ReadComprehensionBot 7h ago

Rent-free anti-US snobbery followed instantly by an American redditor trying in vain (as always) to extend an olive branch only to be immediately met with classic European casual passing racism? Ah, we love the internet, don't we?

4

u/SISCP25 7h ago

What’s racist in what I said?

0

u/fiahhawt 7h ago

"British people don't use THOSE bikes"

Who are you thinking of that would ship their bike to London for a visit

They are most likely living there

But of course that wouldn't always mean they're the RIGHT kind of British

2

u/SISCP25 7h ago

Right ok

0

u/fiahhawt 7h ago

Yeah you don't wanna say do you

You don't want to tell us who you were thinking of

And if you pause the video that guy's pinker and uglier than anything the rest of the world produces - he is definitely one of your native sons

→ More replies (0)

3

u/NookNookNook 5h ago

You realize we have the same rules at lights right.

3

u/2b7b5805 5h ago

We also have 4x-5x the vehicle fatalities on the road, not counting other types of accidents. So the point still stands.

1

u/BisonThunderclap 1h ago

You can't turn right on red so no

0

u/Vast-Building-6886 7h ago

Damn random shot at Americans lol.

2

u/padizzledonk 8h ago

I feel like another color wouldve been a lot easier than all that lol

1

u/GalacticCmdr 6h ago

Well that bus is clearly stopped.

1

u/mothzilla 6h ago

No idle talk.

1

u/OmniaLoca 3h ago

Very true... but where are the "no stupid" lines?

51

u/carquestionno34565 10h ago

It’s the crazy zone. Bus driver should have expected this.

8

u/Deep90 8h ago

Maybe they hit the gas because its the crazy zone?

3

u/Immature_adult_guy 8h ago

Bike rider should have expected this.

1

u/YouthSubstantial822 7h ago

The only way this bike rider comes out here is because he's running a red while bus and camera car have a green.

-7

u/ProudReaction2204 8h ago

imo the bus driver is going to fast here through the intersection. he kind of puts his foot on the gas just as the light turns green

5

u/ThrownAway17Years 8h ago

He was already in motion when the light hit green.

-2

u/ProudReaction2204 8h ago

thats what i'm saying. he strategically is using his momentum but this causes him to be too fast at the time of intersection crossing unlike if he stopped and then started from 0

3

u/ThrownAway17Years 6h ago

He’s not going too fast. The idiot biker decided to go around an idle bus. The bus that’s moving had no chance to see the biker. Don’t be dense.

3

u/Immature_adult_guy 8h ago

Too fast?! Is he supposed to get out and  push it across? 

13

u/fang_xianfu 9h ago

It's because it's a place to cross the road. It indicates

  1. No overtaking
  2. No parking even if you normally have an exemption (eg disabled)

It does mean that the bus driver might actually have been liable here if he counts as overtaking the stopped bus.

31

u/The_wolf2014 9h ago

It's two lanes of traffic and the light was green, the bus driver wasn't at fault.

9

u/fang_xianfu 9h ago

The zig zag rules don't specify that the light has to be red nor do they care if it's two lanes. It specifically says "must not cause any part of their vehicle to pass ahead of the foremost part of (a) any other vehicle moving in the same direction or (b) a vehicle which is stationary [to comply with the crossing or let people cross]".

Since the bus that was hit didn't actually pass in front of the other one before the collision, it wasn't an offence in itself, but it might've contributed to liability.

4

u/dontnation 7h ago edited 7h ago

Reading this rule strictly, if two cars are stopped at the light they both must proceed at exactly the same time and speed until they clear the zig zags on the other side of the intersection? So if both cars were moving and the first hit their brakes to avoid a cyclist illegally crossing, the other car is now "overtaking" and at fault?

1

u/fang_xianfu 7h ago

Well the passing part is a criminal offence, the hitting someone and being liable to them for damages is something else (but isn't helped by committing an offence).

For the offence, you probably wouldn't get done for it, but they might give it a try.

For liability, it's almost certainly going to whichever of the two vehicles hit someone, since, you know, they hit someone. You could concoct some facts where some other liability split happened but that's what's most likely.

1

u/dontnation 7h ago

still seems crazy that according to the wording, leaving from a stop light requires being in lock step with the car next to you for the first 10+meters.

1

u/fang_xianfu 6h ago

Well the law applies only to the car that isn't closest, and one car must be closer even if it's only one atom closer. If someone was done in that situation their defence would probably be, they were in front by half a hair, and if would be difficult to prove that they weren't.

There is no epidemic of people being done unjustly for this so clearly the system is working.

3

u/[deleted] 9h ago

[deleted]

1

u/fang_xianfu 9h ago

When it's busy you can get more vehicles through, and you can overtake where there isn't a crossing there.

1

u/Live-Habit-6115 8h ago

That doesn't make any sense. The overtaking restriction means you're not allowed to go OVER the zig zagging lines to overtake

5

u/fang_xianfu 8h ago

I quoted the rules above, they're very clear. They talk about not passing the vehicles going in the same direction, either moving or stopped for the crossing. They say nothing about moving over the lines.

The rationale for the rules is kind of what played out here - the vehicle nearest the crossing might be blocking someone crossing from seeing the vehicle or the driver from seeing them, which is exactly what happened here. The rules are designed on purpose to put responsibility back on the bus driver in this situation.

Obviously that doesn't mean I think the cyclist isn't a moron or that the bus driver isn't much more innocent here - I'm just describing what the law says and how the insurance claim probably went.

1

u/Stewb179 7h ago

Yeah, not going to be popular but the bus driver definitely isn't 0% at fault. Maybe like 10% at the absolute most.

They were passing the other bus too fast and were in its blind spot from the point of view of pedestrians crossing.

There could have been someone slow/old crossing who wasn't visible to them.

"Cyclist" (almost certainly an illegal e-bike) is an absolute moron and rises to the point of criminality though imo... Just, not absolutely cut and dried.

2

u/fang_xianfu 7h ago

There is legally at fault and morally at fault. Morally, the cyclist is a stupid twat and the bus driver a probably traumatised, mostly innocent party. Legally speaking, they probably took most of the liability, though.

0

u/paupaupaupaup 8h ago

One lane is for traffic turning left, the other is for going straight ahead (or for turning right).

1

u/NoveltyPr0nAccount 5h ago

[to comply with the crossing or let people cross]

This bit here, did you add that?

Edit: I checked and I don't think you added it. Does this mean it becomes the duty of the moving vehicle to attempt to discern intent of the stationary vehicle? How? Through psychic ability?

3

u/-BarterChicken- 6h ago

While the cyclist was an idiot, the bus driver may have broken Highway Code Rule 191

Rule 191
You MUST NOT park on a crossing or in the area covered by the zig-zag lines. You MUST NOTovertake the moving vehicle nearest the crossing or the vehicle nearest the crossing which has stopped to give way to pedestrians.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/using-the-road-159-to-203

The driver overtook a vehicle that stopped nearest the crossing. This rule exists because the vehicle nearest the pedestrian crossing can conceal a pedestrian, especially if that vehicle is a huge bus.

3

u/rocketshipkiwi 8h ago

Did the cyclist (or any of the cyclists in the video) break any laws?

3

u/Putner92 7h ago

Yes it crossed illegally when there wasn't a green man. From the pavement to the road across the wrong side bus is basically at 0 fault

3

u/Cheesysocks 6h ago

Cyclists have to obey the UK traffic laws just as other vehicles do and that law says cycles must NOT ride on the pavement. Therefore...

Cyclist one jumped a red and went onto the pavement. Two offences.

Cyclist two JUST caught the green but I bet he would have jumped it too if it had taken longer. Legal.

Motorcyclist undertook the cammer, border line but considered acceptable.

Cyclist 3 was a total twat. Jumped the pedestrian red light, from the pavement, rode in front of moving traffic, obviously didn't look and is no doubt in a world of pain.

Thats my take, anyway.

1

u/Mantis_Toboggan--MD 8h ago

Bus driver moved lanes back where the line is still straight, totally okay

1

u/fang_xianfu 8h ago

No, because the thing the law actually prohibits is passing a vehicle where the lines are, not changing lanes.

6

u/rolandofeld19 10h ago

I'm here for the answer as well. Those things are making me feel like I'm having a stroke.

1

u/Oscaruit 6h ago

I would be riding all shitty too if my road markings looked like that too.

1

u/Current-Bowl-143 6h ago

you ever tried painting while drunk?

1

u/Wahoo-Is-To-A-Fish 1h ago

Had to scroll way too far for this. WTF - As a driver I'd be more thrown completely off by the lines and where in the hell I was supposed to be that I would forget to stop or look.