***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 33 *****
==============================================================
More pedal power chat.
PLEASE NOTE:-
To try and maintain some kind of logical order of discussion, if you start a new subject then reply to this post and remember to change the default subject header.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 17 May 17 at 10:39
|
This should make a few people happy:
tinyurl.com/hrl26c6
|
|
All very well, but have you ever seen a car driver fined £2460?
|
I agree.
I think what he did was irresponsible, pompous and dangerous but even so the fine is a ridiculous amount for the offence.
With his wealth it won't have any effect anyway.
Far better to make him do a few hours community service and reflect upon his actions while picking up litter.
Pat
|
|
I agree, if they wanted to teach him a lesson and inconvenience him far better some litter picking etc than a fine that's loose change to him.
|
>> All very well, but have you ever seen a car driver fined £2460?
>>
Any car driver who did the things this guy did would have been banned for at least a year and possibly more.
This guy can get on his bike tomorrow and pedal off wherever he wants
The same range of penalties were not open for use on the cyclist.
edit Isn't income a factor in the possible size of fines
Last edited by: commerdriver on Thu 27 Oct 16 at 15:11
|
>> Any car driver who did the things this guy did would have been banned for
>> at least a year and possibly more.
>> This guy can get on his bike tomorrow and pedal off wherever he wants
>> The same range of penalties were not open for use on the cyclist.
>>
The worst bit about the story was the magistrate saying an unqualified "people don't like cyclists". Nice to see our judges have such an open mind about perfectly legal and normal daily activities!
|
The worst bit about the story was the magistrate saying an unqualified "people don't like
>> cyclists".
Just stating fact some people don't, right or wrong.
|
|
I agree that some people do and some people don't. That's fine. But she didn't say "some people don't like cyclists", she said "people don't like cyclists" which is an outrageously narrow-minded statement from a magistrate. I gather a complaint has been made.
|
>> I agree that some people do and some people don't. That's fine. But she didn't
>> say "some people don't like cyclists", she said "people don't like cyclists" which is an
>> outrageously narrow-minded statement from a magistrate.
It seemed perfectly obvious (to me anyway) that it was just some people, otherwise she'd have said 'everyone' or 'all people'
I gather a complaint has been made.
Oh I've no doubt about that.
|
|
What fantastic tyres these are! Since fitting them to my Brompton many miles ago I have had zero punctures in many miles of London commuting (about 2,000 miles/annum). The blue carcase of the rear tyre is now showing through so I need to replace it, but what fantastic durability. Recommended!
|
>> What fantastic tyres these are! Since fitting them to my Brompton many miles ago I
>> have had zero punctures in many miles of London commuting (about 2,000 miles/annum). The blue
>> carcase of the rear tyre is now showing through so I need to replace it,
>> but what fantastic durability. Recommended!
I think the blue carcase is the Kevlar puncture proofing. No?
|
|
I think the Marathon Plus has a thick elastic layer ( the blue bit) rather than Kevlar. They are said to be better than the Kevlar ones at preventing punctures. I know I took a thorn out of my Brompton kevlar tyre a few weeks ago.
|
"What fantastic tyres these are! "
Agree 100% - I've fitted them on all 4 of our bikes; I wouldn't waste my time with anything else.
|
Can be tough to fit due to the rigidity of the sidewalls.
Agree though - no punctures on mine either.
|
>>Can be tough to fit due to the rigidity of the sidewalls.
I recall riding a bike, thirty or so years ago, with solid tyres. They had all the resilience of concrete and the rolling resistance of 20 PSI.
Any improvements?
|
Well, the Schwalbes on my Brompton run at 95 psi, so yes the rolling resistance is better!
I too remember riding a bike with solid tyres -hard work it was!
|
Say 306 people.
My council would not even take notice of a petition with that few signatories. Plus, if you read the article, the originator of the petition is no longer calling for a ban as such.
|
|
There are a couple of A road NSL dual carriageways near here that have cycling bans, probably saved a few lives.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 2 Nov 16 at 17:47
|
>> There are a couple of A road NSL dual carriageways near here that have cycling
>> bans, probably saved a few lives.
Doubt it, given the cycling death toll for whole of UK is less than 200 per annum and that biggest danger, ignoring London skip/tip issue, is single carriageway A/B roads.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 2 Nov 16 at 21:35
|
|
I think the problem is speed differentials, a 70 mph road, someone not looking far ahead, spots a cyclist too late with no escape route, not good. One of the roads I mentioned had a situation where a lorry driver saw a tractor too late, lane two was full of fast moving traffic, he went left off a short viaduct that looks like a road and crosses a deep ravine which is heavily wooded and also not visible from the road. He died.
|
|
Probably a good argument for a lower speed limit on that stretch.
|
|
It is a normal main road, are you suggesting a lower NSL? How many roads do you know with lethal drops or roadside obstructions and a 70 limit?
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 3 Nov 16 at 08:26
|
|
I wouldn't fancy cycling either the A82 or A9 but I know some do!!
|
>> I think the problem is speed differentials, a 70 mph road, someone not looking far
>> ahead, spots a cyclist too late with no escape route, not good.
>>
The A24 has a 50 mph limit for the section in question on the petition. The Council (my Council!) dismissed the petition, rightly so, as it is outside of their control to impose speed limits.
|
Trial of driver in summer incident with Jeremy Vine (tinyurl.com/jrxswfu) has been going on during week.
Her Counsel seems to be scraping the barrel suggesting Vine only publicised it to raise his profile:
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jan/13/jeremy-vine-used-road-rage-video-to-boost-facebook-profile
|
A driver filmed screaming obscenities at BBC presenter Jeremy Vine as he cycled on a narrow road has been found guilty of road rage offences.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-38824924
|
>> narrow road has been found guilty of road rage offences.
>>
Guardian report says: "Pearson was nine months into a suspended sentence for theft, assault causing actual bodily harm, and resisting arrest at the time of the altercation with Vine."
Vine says that
twitter.com/theJeremyVine/status/826751393826533376
Especially concerning that Ms Pearson tweeted the message below *while the court case was in progress*
Shanique Pearson
@realdeanporter yea il be back straight back behind the wheel and let's up you don't ever get infrount of my car cah I wouldn't b stopping 🙂
Judge her character by her own words twitter.com/ShaniquePearso2/with_replies
|
Jeremy Vine 'road rage' driver to appeal against conviction
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39125341
Her appeal will be heard on 18 April.
|
|
I wonder what grounds she has to appeal? After all, there was strong video evidence...
|
Can you appeal if you just don't like the verdict, or does there have to be some legal reason why you think the verdict was wrong?
I imagine the latter, otherwise everyone would appeal every time they lost, assuming it was being paid for somehow?
|
>>otherwise everyone would appeal every time they lost,
One of the appeal courts options is to increase the penalty.
|
>> I wonder what grounds she has to appeal?
Her arrogant attitude I would imagine.
|
>> I wonder what grounds she has to appeal? After all, there was strong video evidence...
AIUI she was convicted at Hammersmith Magistrates Court. The bench was District Judge Timothy King, what used to be called a Stipendiary Magistrate (ie paid, qualified and professional). He committed her to Crown Court for sentence, presumably because he thought appropriate jail term or fine was beyond his powers.
She has a pretty well absolute right to appeal verdict to Crown Court and has done so.
If the Judge there thinks she's wasted his time he can reflect that in sentence.
My guess is she's going to jail.....
|
>>My guess is she's going to jail.....
9 months in jail - prbably 3/4 months then tagged BUT I am sure she will regret her attitude to others & the courts!
|
>> BUT I am sure she will regret her attitude to others & the courts!
>>
Well to date, as a repeated offender she does not seem to be on a an upward curve.
The mother-of-one .... was already subject to a suspended sentence for previous convictions including robbery, thefts and assault.
|
>>Well to date, as a repeated offender she does not seem to be on a an upward curve.
3 / 4 months porridge will be "a shock"
I know a chap who stole a lorry load of wood aged 23/24 - 1st offender - law abiding for the last 50 years!
|
The panels verdict? I am with most of the commenters, the cyclist is an idiot for putting himself in a dangerous place.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4271154/Cyclist-squeezed-cycle-lane-bus-driver.html
(moved and re-titled, as nothing to do with Jeremy Vine's discussion)
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 2 Mar 17 at 10:04
|
|
Yep. totally agree. Placing himself in unnecessary danger and appearing to pedal on despite the bus taking his space. Bus also wrong for crossing the line but no-one would mourn a dead bus...
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 2 Mar 17 at 10:04
|
Surprise, surprise. The usual suspects, those who thought Vine author of own misfortune, blame the cyclist in this one.
There is a reserved cycle lane there. Highway code rule 140 You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Any driver, never mind one holding a professional licence, should know that and be aware that in stop start urban traffic, they are likely to have cyclists in the lane passing on the nearside. Even if the bus driver was a complete novice to the route he'd see the lane and obey the markings.
He didn't and he's wholly to blame.
The incident does though indicate the danger of placing a narrow cycle lane right in the gutter. The cyclist is less visible to pretty much all other road users and has, if it all goes belly up, nowhere to go but up the kerb. Worse, if there's a safety fence he's cheese in a cheese grater...
In that cyclist's shoes I'd probably be integrating myself into the traffic and, subject to usual rules around zebra crossing zig-zags, overtaking on the offside.
And for that i'd no doubt incur the wrath of Smokie and ON for not riding in the nice safe lane provided for me.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 2 Mar 17 at 11:19
|
I did state the the bus was in the wrong.
But anyone with an ounce of anticipation, common sense and self-preservation would have been able to predict the path of that bus and wouldn't have pushed on accelerating into it's path.
I don't watch many cyclist clips but those which I do tend to show cyclists with GoPros and attitude who have no concept of personal safety, then getting their lycra in a twist about a near miss. But backing off to safety just wouldn't be the same on social media....
I don't consider that cyclists should only ride in the cycle lane but I don't see why they wouldn't unless there are over-riding reasons not to, again for safety's sake. Otherwise what's the point of trying to segregate the traffic? You don't want buses in your lane, drivers don't want cyclists in theirs. Seems fair...
Just for the record I am not anti cyclist but I do think cyclists are sometimes a nuisance on the roads, just as BMW drivers, Audi drivers, taxi drivers, women drivers, lorry drivers, pedestrians on mobiles - in fact any other road users - are... :-)
|
|
I don't recall posting anything about Jeremy Vine. I Stand by my opinion that cyclists who put themselves in danger are idiots. I don't put myself alongside big vehicles that could crush me in my car or on my bike and would be an idiot if I did.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 2 Mar 17 at 12:01
|
>> I don't recall posting anything about Jeremy Vine.
You didn't as such, but tagged it onto the on-going discussion about him rather than replying to the first post in this thread, which the "please note" message asks you to do when starting a new subject.
|
|
Slapped wrist accepted! :-P
|
Not quite cycling but similar to other films we've seen here.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-north-west-wales-39203190
Must admit to being surprised that the motorcyclist didn't react in time to do anything at all, not even a twitch. I know I did, watching the film first time, but then I knew the ending :-)
(Just out of interest my body twitched to the right, going round the nearside of the van. I was a biker many years ago...)
Last edited by: smokie on Wed 8 Mar 17 at 15:49
|
|
I've been in that sort of situation a couple of times. In my case I quickly ruled out trying to go round the problem and just hit the brakes as hard as possible, in a straight line, to minimise the final impact.
|
No mention whether the biker had his lights on.
If it was the case that he didn't, then perhaps the van driver purely didn't see him because of the shady avenue of trees the biker was riding through just prior to the accident.
Finding a lengthier video on The Daily Post website, the biker was also wearing dark clothing.
www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/helmet-cam-captures-bikers-screams-12709119
Looks like a case of both parties being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Biker was lucky to escape with his life though, and the longer vid clip actually shows him hobbling around just after the accident.
|
>>Looks like a case of both parties being in the wrong place at the wrong time<<
No, whichever way you try to rationalise or excuse this, the van was, without a doubt, in the wrong.
Pat
|
>> No, whichever way you try to rationalise or excuse this, the van was, without a
>> doubt, in the wrong.
>>
>> Pat
>>
Absolutely , but there is still some responsibility to look out for other drivers doing something wrong, aspecially when you are on two wheels and will always come off worse in a contact.
Driving / riding / cycling always starts with the assumption that the roads around you are full of nutters who aren't paying attention.
|
|
Don't ride anything with two wheels unless you accept falling or beings knocked off it. The same applies to skis, skates, and anything that is inherently unstable.
|
|
A accident is in a small corner.Lady car driver on handsfree nearly wiped me out crossing the road.She never noticed me to busy talking away.Not my time yet but not far off.>:)
|
>> the van was, without a doubt, in the wrong.
Yes, but as I said earlier, if the factors that I previously mentioned were also the case, then the biker has to apportion some of the blame for not making himself visible enough.
As per usual with the press though, not every detail has been mentioned.
EDIT - I just re-read one of the reports, and it transpires the van driver was wearing sunglasses, which would also lessen his view of the road ahead and make it less obvious to see anything in the shady area of the avenue of trees.
In short, the van driver should have taken a longer look before turning. If (and there are no reports suggesting it was the case) the biker was riding with no lights on, then he's invisible under the shade of those trees.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 8 Mar 17 at 19:59
|
There is no legal requirement for a biker to use lights in the hours of daylight and in fact, a lot of them are very much against it.
Let's look at it this way, had the biker have been driving a black car, wearing a black jumper and failed to turn his sidelights on in the shady part of the road, would he have been partly to blame for the accident?:)
Pat
|
|
Side (parking) lights are useless on a moving car or motorbike. If you need lights when on the move you need a headlight(s).
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 9 Mar 17 at 07:53
|
>> There is no legal requirement for a biker to use lights in the hours of
>> daylight
But it can often be a wise move to use lights during the hours of daylight.
"See and be seen", let that be your watchword.
>> Let's look at it this way, had the biker have been driving a black car,
>> wearing a black jumper and failed to turn his sidelights on in the shady part
>> of the road, would he have been partly to blame for the accident?:)
The colour of a car driver's clothing, as it is normally unseen, is of no relevance in this discussion.
A car (and other vehicles) driver should consider using lights when visibility is reduced. In fact expert opinion suggests that we should all use daytime running lights.
Please pass this on to your mahouts at the next course you run. :)
|
>>Please pass this on to your mahouts at the next course you run. :) <<
That will be tomorrow and none of them ride motorbikes.
So I will decline.
Pat
|
>> There is no legal requirement for a biker to use lights in the hours of daylight
Correct.
>> and in fact, a lot of them are very much against it.
Well that's news to me. It must be a regional thing then, because in these 'ere parts bikers frown upon those who don't ride with their lights on.
>> Let's look at it this way, had the biker have been driving a black car, wearing a black jumper and failed to turn his sidelights on in the shady part of the road, would he have been partly to blame for the accident?:)
A car is much bigger than a bike, therefore more visible, so no comparison whatsoever.
At the end of the day, it's about self preservation and always expect the unexpected.
Within ¼ hour of starting to learn to drive, my driving instructor said to me, "you ride a motorbike, don't you?. Most of my pupils who ride bikes take extra care at junctions and don't automatically take it for granted that they have right of way".
|
>>A car is much bigger than a bike, therefore more visible, so no comparison whatsoever.
<<
You are so wrong.
In shady conditions a big shadow is just as invisible as a little shadow.
The van driver was 100% to blame, and if his judgement of speed is that bad, he needs a better guide dog.
Pat
|
I know I harp on about it, but there is a physiological reason why it is possible to look without seeing, especially with an object that is on a collision course, and why "scanning" is unreliable. It is to do with how the eyes work.
When scanning, you are more likely to see big objects than small ones for the simple reason that they are less likely to fall into a saccade.
Really good drivers, and even some average ones like me, always look twice.
It's all in here. Regular readers will have seen it before. I think it should be taught.
www.slobc.org/safety/documents/road-survival-guide.pdf
|
|
Of course smaller objects are more difficult to spot. Stands to reason. The reasons why things are seen; shape, shine, shadow... ;)
|
>> In shady conditions a big shadow is just as invisible as a little shadow.
So, do you think the van driver would have turned across into the path of a massive lorry then?
>> if his judgement of speed is that bad, he needs a better guide dog.
If you read the news reports, you'd have seen he had an eye test afterwards, which showed his vision was fine.
>> The van driver was 100% to blame
I'm not disputing that as such, but what are your thoughts on him not seeing the motorcyclist then?
|
Two different things really....
The first being whose fault it was, and in this case it was entirely the van driver.
The second being what steps either could have taken to avoid the accident. And that is not unlike the arguments with cyclists when they maintain that they are not at fault, even thought hey could have lessened the chances of an incident.
In this case I'm not sure the bike could have done much. Slower seems unlikely to have helped, he wasn't going very fast anyway. 45 was it?. Looking ahead, not really the guy turned across him immediately in front. Short of firing off a firework, I'm not sure how he could have increased his chances of being seen.
Seems to me that its the sort of accident which happens when human beings share the same space.
|
>>I'm not disputing that as such, but what are your thoughts on him not seeing the motorcyclist then?<<
It's a classic case of looking far ahead and not seeing what is close to you.
We all do it at times and as manatee says, most of us try and remember to register things close as well as far.
As you say, as a motorcyclist you tend to be a bit prepared for this sort of thing.
Pat
|
No mention whether the biker had his lights on.
From the instrument binnacle, the bike looks like a recent Triumph. Like all bikes these days its lights will be hard-wired on. I know that bit of road very, very well - it carries a number of red flags, not least for vehicles emerging from the turning from the junction onto the main road. Visibility for those drivers is very limited. Factor in the fact that it is pretty dark there due to the tree canopy - it is a slow careful drive in all directions. I think I might have slammed on. It is difficult to figure out the speed of the bike - if it was a proper helmet camera(with GPS) it would have speed data embedded on the memory card - that data would have been available to investigators if they would have wanted it.
|
>> but then I knew the ending :-)
That's the problem with critiquing drivers/riders reaction to any of these vids whether this, last week's bus/cyclist or the one a few months ago with cyclist and Brett's artic.
|
tinyurl.com/zn5eakl
Having seen the speed some cyclists ride through red lights and over pedestrian crossings in London, I'm not totally against this.
I'm a cyclist.
|
>>I'm a cyclist...
Yeah, me too, sounds like a fab opportunity to get "big air" time if you hit them fast enough !
Bring it on ! ;-)
|
|
There is no point in putting speed bumps on roadside cycle lanes, cyclists don't use them. They would only be useful on cycle paths with no other option like the disused railway line paths and park paths. As the pace of life here is somewhat less frenetic than the big cities lunatic cyclists are very rare. Ben Nevis (and other) mountain cycle courses excepted. :-)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 10 Mar 17 at 08:58
|
|
That's a good point, I expect a number of them would simplygo round the speed bumps...
|
cycling.today/vidette-dangerous-driver-fired-after-the-video-goes-viral/
Outrageous behavior and that of a bully - man in a 2 ton van against a cycle.
|
How on earth does somebody driving a liveried think he can get away with that?
At any time never mind in era of helmet and dashcam footage.
|
People when doing such things don't think straight. Nothing surprising in a sense many people struggle to control their feelings, especially on the road.
He'll plenty of time to think it over now he's on the dole.
|
Very similar thing has, just about an hour ago, happened to my wife and I. We were on our bikes in a local town and had moved across ( safely ) to the centre line to turn right and both of us had our arms extended to the right to signal our intentions. We had to pause to wait for oncoming traffic to pass but just as we were clear to turn, a white van actually overtook us from behind on our right, at speed and of course at a junction. There was plenty of room for him to pass on our left but for some reason he deliberately didn't, almost touching us as he went past.
If we hadn't had our wits about us, one or both of us would could have turned right into his path.
We were both wearing hi-vis clothes, it was broad daylight and the view would have been crystal clear.
No harm done in the end other than to our nerves, but what a plank.
|
|
You have to wonder what's going on in peoples heads when they do something like that. Not only does a bit of uncontrolled impatience risk serious consequences for the victim, but a conviction for causing death or serious injury ain't going to make your own future a bed of roses either.
|
I've been riding bikes in traffic for over 50 years and have never once had an accident involving another road user. But, I put that down mainly to working on the assumption that most of them haven't seen me and the ones who have, are intent on killing me !
;-)
|
There is a sense by some road users at the moment that cyclists are always in the wrong and this attitude will lead to deaths. A crackdown and some serious prosecutions and jail time would be useful.
I was knocked off when a car didn't see me and pulled out of at a T-Junction when I was 12 and "TBoned" me. Luckily not seriously hurt but the driver refused to accept the blame as I wasn't as important as him and his Rover P6! He was cautioned in the end.
Last edited by: zippy on Sun 7 May 17 at 15:40
|
|
There is a folding bike group test in this weeks Auto Express. Eight bikes tested, Bromptons first and third.
|
Chris Froome has a folding bike.
It didn't fold when he got it, but thanks to a psychopathic motorist...
|
Good God.
I suspect that the cyclist is one of the sanctimonious self-righteous road users, but how on earth can the driver justify that behaviour?
And why on earth weren't they up on an attempted murder charge?
I'd question whether than person should ever be permitted a driving license again.
|
>>And why on earth weren't they up on an attempted murder charge?
I agree totally with you on that one, yes attempted murder at least I would say.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 11 May 17 at 02:31
|
>> I suspect that the cyclist is one of the sanctimonious self-righteous road users, but how
>> on earth can the driver justify that behaviour?
>>
.......well, that is possible, but reports of the incident elsewhere indicate that there was a preceding incident, not just a case of being 'a***y' about using the mobile for the sake of it:
The court heard that she had nearly collided with her victim as she pulled out in front of Doughty, a cycle courier, while using her phone in the Stoke Newington area of north-east London
>> And why on earth weren't they up on an attempted murder charge?
....presumably because that or an attempted manslaughter* charge would require proof of intent (to kill) which would be nigh on impossible.
It took a bit of searching to find she was charged with causing serious injury by dangerous driving, for which the maximum sentence is 5 years - why on earth she didn't get that maximum sentence is a mystery (since it was patently "with intent", even if not to kill).
*I'm not even sure that "attempted manslaughter" exists as a chargeable offence - I can see logic behind that, though I think it can sometimes under extenuating circumstances be presented as a reduced verdict from attempted murder.
|
It took a bit of searching to find she was charged with causing serious injury by dangerous driving, for which the maximum sentence is 5 years - why on earth she didn't get that maximum sentence is a mystery (since it was patently "with intent", even if not to kill).
Yes charge of attempted murder wouldn't stick. There is no evidence of intent to kill and I doubt very much that she did intend to kill.
It is rare for a judge to give a maximum sentence for any crime. I guess the view is that it is possible to comprehend a worse example of the offence.
Whilst clearly premeditated I rather think that in her mind it was her intention to teach the cyclist a lesson rather than do him serious injury. She didn't really think of the consequences - she does did it.
|
>> It took a bit of searching to find she was charged with causing serious injury
>> by dangerous driving, for which the maximum sentence is 5 years - why on earth
>> she didn't get that maximum sentence is a mystery (since it was patently "with intent",
>> even if not to kill).
For anyone who isn't a repeat offender to whom prison is just an occupational hazard it's not the end of the world. For the rest of us, three years banged up with the dregs of society is a terrifying prospect, even if you only serve a third of it in custody.
If you disagree, just imagine being led from the dock handcuffed to a security guard with that prospect in front of you.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 12 May 17 at 16:57
|
|
Cannot find this year's review on line yet but it looks like something they do every few years. Brompton usually wins these things unless price is weighted in results. No doubt they're expensive but for anyone saving London commuter fares the payback period is pretty rapid.
|
Let's hope that aggressive cyclists get the message that being wannabe traffic cops and damaging door mirrors can be painful or fatal.
No chance.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 11 May 17 at 08:16
|
LOL. To say 'serves him right' is a bit harsh as nobody deserves to be run over like that. But I bet he never has another go at a motorist.
3 years isn't long enough though. Nothing like.
The cyclist who broke my rear light - and scratched my car - when he drove into me in Parliament Square got off lightly (failing to stop after an accident he bothered off).
|
>>3 years isn't long enough though. Nothing like.
Agreed. Should have been attempted murder.
|
|
Cyclists are vulnerable on roads. They never however have that attitude and never ride like it. Every cyclist in London is a looney left wing tree hugger constantly squealing about their rights to ride as when and where they like, even if it kills them. And when it does its always someone else's fault.
|
>>Every cyclist in London is a looney left wing tree hugger constantly squealing about their rights to ride as when and where they like
Pigswill!
|
I'm on neither side on this argument but here are a few facts.
We have +/-100 lorries and at least 10 of them do Central London daily delivering at least 6 deliveries each.
The drivers all get a measly compulsory 7 hours training per year on HSE, Drivers Hours, Road Safety, First Aid, Load Security, compliance, health and welfare, vehicle maintenance etc.
The powers that be (DVSA, JAUPT, TFL, BRAKE etc) have now forced us to use 30 mins of that precious 7 hours on VRU's sorry, Vulnerable Road Users, namely cyclist. The rest of the syllabus is optional within those boundaries.
It provokes more animosity than any other part of the course.
Now, we worked out the last time one of our vehicles had an accident involving a cyclist and it turns out to be in 2002, yes, 15 years ago.
And that wasn't actually an accident.
The cyclist called our driver something rather rude, so he stopped his lorry in the middle of the road and floored him.
He was sacked, he had to be, but it still makes me smile!
A waste of time, yes, most certainly I could use that 30 minutes to talk about road positioning and defensive driving.
Pat
|
I wouldn't say every cyclist, but there is a significant minority in London who are complete and total idiots. I walk from Waterloo Station to Chancery Lane a couple of times most weeks, and without fail I see multiple instances of cyclists ignoring red lights and road markings, cutting across lanes without signalling, riding through zebra crossings when people are on them, and generally sticking two fingers up to traffic laws. It's only a few, but there are enough of them that I spot a number of them every single time I visit.
Make them carry unique identifiers such as plates, and have third party insurance (simply bringing them into line with every other vehicle that uses public roads), and I am sure you would end this behaviour overnight. There is a degree of both anonymity and legal impunity for cyclists that is denied to all other road users, and this does reflect in the behaviour of some.
Last edited by: DP on Thu 11 May 17 at 16:16
|
>> I wouldn't say every cyclist, but there is a significant minority in London who are
>> complete and total idiots. >>
There is a significant minority of all road users in London (and elsewhere) who are complete and total idiots, however the implications are much greater if they are driving a car or lorry rather than riding a cycle.
|
>> >> I wouldn't say every cyclist, but there is a significant minority in London who
>> are
>> >> complete and total idiots. >>
>>
>> There is a significant minority of all road users in London (and elsewhere) who are
>> complete and total idiots, however the implications are much greater if they are driving a
>> car or lorry rather than riding a cycle.
Thats my point, the implications are much higher for the cyclist. And precious few of them appear as tho they understand that in the way they cycle.
|
>> however the implications are much greater if they are driving a
>> car or lorry rather than riding a cycle.
>>
Not if you are on the recieving end of an impact! Many cyclists seem to have a self preservation failure.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Thu 11 May 17 at 16:51
|
>> There is a significant minority of all road users in London (and elsewhere) who are
>> complete and total idiots, however the implications are much greater if they are driving a
>> car or lorry rather than riding a cycle.
Disagree 100%... because... a car driver will not die in London. A cyclist will. So the implications for an idiot on a bike are much higher than for an idiot in a car...
Last night I watched a cyclist going down Endell St towards Bow St as I was standing on Long Acre. He was going at quite some rate. He shouted at a pedestrian. A few yards later he then collided with another pedestrian who was sent flying. Needless to say he came off and was foul-mouthing the poor pedestrian. Fortunately a crowd of passers-by had seen it and gave him what for. Hope the police came, no idea though.
3 years wouldn't be good enough for him.
|
>> >> There is a significant minority of all road users in London (and elsewhere) who
>> are complete and total idiots, however the implications are much greater if they are driving a car or lorry rather than riding a cycle.
>>
>> Disagree 100%... because... a car driver will not die in London. A cyclist will. So
>> the implications for an idiot on a bike are much higher than for an idiot
>> in a car...
>>
On the basis of the idiotic road user in question putting themselves in danger, i.e. a cyclist pulling out in front of a lorry etc, then I am with you; my point was that an idiot behind the wheel of a vehicle can do much more damage than an idiot riding a cycle.
|
|
Of course. I was just feeling sorry for the poor cyclist. The nice young ladies wearing skirts who wobble around Parliament Square on a Boris Bike, for instance.
|
>> Last night I watched a cyclist going down Endell St towards Bow St as I
>> was standing on Long Acre.
Long Acre>Bow St>Exeter St > Strand was part of my commute for six months I worked just off Victoria Street. Pedestrians round there wander on and off road at will. It's just part of Covent Garden's charm.
Keep chilled, keep speed down and brakes covered. Non aggressive use of the bell draws attention then use voice, eye contact and friendly gestures to negotiate priority. It's not difficult.
Behaving like an an angry twonk saves seconds at most and you arrive at work stressed.
|
|
Odd isn't it? I've been driving, walking and cycling around London for more than 3 decades. Never once come into conflict with anyone. As with most things in life, you can make your own luck if you want to.
|
>> Odd isn't it? I've been driving, walking and cycling around London for more than 3
>> decades.
No wonder you look tired ;)
|
Ha ha very good ! ;-)
But it's true though isn't it, most fights require at least two combatants, and if you're not prepared to be one, then generally they don't happen.
If you just go about your journey, however you are propelling yourself, conducting yourself properly, and accepting that others may not do so, by and large you can get through it without too much stress.
|
>>I wouldn't say every cyclist, but there is a significant minority in London who are complete and total idiots.
Agreed, I have seen idiots in London. The ones that get me are turning right at red lights across the flow of traffic. They must have a death wish!
Traffic measures don't help. In central London a while ago, a cycle lane allowed cycles to travel the wrong way down a one way street with T-Junctions. Madness and an accident waiting to happen if a driver misses the cyclist hidden by a lorry in front when they make a turn.
It is not only limited to London though. One phenomenon here is ninja cyclists. Nearly always BMXs with riders in black and unlit at night, they zip across roads with not so much as a glance in your direction. How there haven't been more fatalities escapes me.
A clamp down on idiot cyclists in London would go a long way to improving the lot of other cyclists around the country. Start policing them. Confiscate bikes ridden idiotically.
|
>> >>Every cyclist in London is a looney left wing tree hugger constantly squealing about their
>> rights to ride as when and where they like
>>
>> Pigswill!
>>
>>
To paint every cyclist in the same light is the sort of statement that encourages idiot car drivers to think that they are kings of the road and make no adjustment in their driving style to accommodate other totally legitimate road users.
|
Cyclist fined - John Boy
