biker jk wrote:
..........If you read the DM article on the moron motorist driving on the shared path the goose journalists make the incorrect claim that the path is a bicycle lane and has to be used by the cyclists. That is one of many examples highlighting the poor quality of journalism.
to save having to stir around in the fetid garbage to find it:
REVEALED: Cyclists who enraged a driver by taking up all of a road and forcing him to use a bike path WERE breaking the law - but not for the reason you might think
".....Police investigated the clash and have charged the driver with using a mobile phone while driving, driving on a cycle path and using offensive language.
Meanwhile one of the cyclists was interviewed and released without charge, despite the footage showing them breaking a law.....
..... cyclists are breaking the law if they fail to use a bicycle lane when there is one available, unless they have a good reason not to do so."
etc etc 3 journalists fail to differentiate between a bicycle lane and a shared path ....I don't expect everyone to understand that nuance in law but I do expect
responsible journalists to ask a few simple questions that don't suit their story line or their perceptions of their intended audience
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... g-law.html