Crackdown on cyclists nets #3000

Marc Brett said:

On 25 May 2007 03:07:17 -0700, "The other view point, there is one you

know... said:

Marc Brett said:

On Thu, 24 May 2007 09:25:25 +0100, [email hidden] (Roger

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Merriman) wrote:
> i don't have any sympathy for red light running. it's a bad idea.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It seems like an obviously bad idea, but like helmet wearing, there is
some cast doubt on this common sense conclusion, especially given the
TfL paper saying red-light jumpers (not runners) may be safer than those
who stick to the letter of the law.

Quoted message said:

gawd, so not stopping at red lights is now as dangerous as wearing
helmets, where do you lot get off on all this?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1695668.ece

Quoted message said:

Top tip, stay away from lorries at junctions...

...and if one comes up beside you and stops, jump the lights before he
crushes you.

I can see the risk if the lorry is going to turn left, but the article
just says accelerated away...

Wonder how many have been Killed or seriously injured fro jumping red
lights...

Tony Raven said:

The other view point, there is one you know... wrote on 25/05/2007 11:07
+0100:

Quoted message said:

Top tip, stay away from lorries at junctions...

Fine but any top tips for getting them to stay away from you at junctions?

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

yes, be aware of your surroundings, look around, don't forget the
'life saver', 'we' have to share the roads, if a anyone just appears
in someones blind spot it likely to cause problems...

Tom Crispin wrote on 25/05/2007 16:31 +0100:

Quoted message said:

In the days of horse and cart was there ever a need for traffic
control?

Yes actually. The city streets filled up with what you might expect and
the bodies of horses that died working such that in cities when it
rained they had crossing sweepers who would part the brown liquid to
allow you to cross the road and licensed dung collectors to sweep it up.
In dry periods people would be breathing in the dust in the streets
which together with the stench and flies created major health hazards.
http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/578.html

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

The other view point, there is one you know... wrote on 25/05/2007 16:51
+0100:

Quoted message said:

I can see the risk if the lorry is going to turn left, but the article
just says accelerated away...

Wonder how many have been Killed or seriously injured fro jumping red
lights...

In London two cyclists were killed jumping red lights over the four
years from 2001-5. A further three were killed over the same period
crossing on a green light and being hit by a motor vehicle running a red
light.
Source: TfL

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

Tom Crispin said:

In the days of horse and cart was there ever a need for traffic
control?

My granny gave up driving a horse drawn tram during WWI after she ran
over a pedestrian - so there would have been a need ... :-((

Dan Gregory said:

Tom Crispin said:

In the days of horse and cart was there ever a need for traffic
control?

My granny gave up driving a horse drawn tram during WWI after she ran
over a pedestrian - so there would have been a need ... :-((

nb must have been a few years earlier

Quoted message said:

Tony Raven said:

Fine but any top tips for getting them to stay away from you at junctions?

yes, be aware of your surroundings, look around, don't forget the
'life saver', 'we' have to share the roads, if a anyone just appears
in someones blind spot it likely to cause problems...

So, you're at a junction and a 38 tonne artic pulls up. Your claim
appears to be that if only the cyclist had looked round and seen it
coming, the artic would have - what? exploded? gone a different way?
turned into a harmless butterfly?

I think you've rather missed the point.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

"Matt B" < wrote...

Quoted message said:

Mike Sales said:

I may have got something wrong here, but since I recently began driving
and took notice of the speed limits for motor vehicles I have realised
very few lorries (over 7.5 tons I think) stick to the speed limit on the
rural A roads round here. Don't they have tachographs? Surely it would e
easy to stop this law breaking?

Are they causing huge numbers of accidents?

More deaths per vehicle than cars, and the effect of HGVs thundering down
the A17 at more than sixty mph ( like the one which overtook me {whilst
driving}) is supressing road use by more vulnerable modes. This is arguably
worse than the deaths.
Mike Sales

Tony Raven said:

The other view point, there is one you know... wrote on 25/05/2007 11:07
+0100:

Quoted message said:

Top tip, stay away from lorries at junctions...

Quoted message said:

Fine but any top tips for getting them to stay away from you at junctions?

Hold to the middle of your lane. Which reminds me, I've just ordered the
latest edition of Cyclecraft from Waterstones. It's £2.66 + p&p. It
strikes me that that's a bargain.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Lincoln City 0-2 Southend United (AET)
Swansea City 2-2 Southend United
We went up twice with Tilly and Brush

Tony Raven said:

In London two cyclists were killed jumping red lights over the four
years from 2001-5. A further three were killed over the same period
crossing on a green light and being hit by a motor vehicle running a red
light.
Source: TfL

That sounds like risk compensation in play.

A cyclist crossing on red is going to pay more attention to motorists
than a cyclist crossing on green, thus they are safer.

As for the motorists, their only concern is to reach the rear of the
next traffic jam as soon as possible, and pay little or no attention
to passing cyclists.

Ian Smith said:

Quoted message said:

On 25 May, 16:25, Tony Raven <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Fine but any top tips for getting them to stay away from you at junctions?

Quoted message said:

yes, be aware of your surroundings, look around, don't forget the
'life saver', 'we' have to share the roads, if a anyone just appears
in someones blind spot it likely to cause problems...

So, you're at a junction and a 38 tonne artic pulls up. Your claim
appears to be that if only the cyclist had looked round and seen it
coming, the artic would have - what? exploded? gone a different way?
turned into a harmless butterfly?

I think you've rather missed the point.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

What if you were to let the lorry go, before you set off?

it's not going to happen often is it, and the risk is rather high if
you do set off at the same time. Do you think that others should do
your thinking for you?

The other view point, there is one you know... wrote on 25/05/2007 20:28
+0100:

Quoted message said:

What if you were to let the lorry go, before you set off?

it's not going to happen often is it, and the risk is rather high if
you do set off at the same time. Do you think that others should do
your thinking for you?

You mean and get caught in the classic lorry turning left and killing
cyclist manoeuvre? You obviously haven't been keeping up with what has
been the major cause of cyclist deaths in London

--
Tony

"The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there
is no good evidence either way."
- Bertrand Russell

Quoted message said:

Ian Smith said:

Quoted message said:

On 25 May, 16:25, Tony Raven <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

> Fine but any top tips for getting them to stay away from you at junctions?

Quoted message said:

yes, be aware of your surroundings, look around, don't forget the
'life saver', 'we' have to share the roads, if a anyone just appears
in someones blind spot it likely to cause problems...

So, you're at a junction and a 38 tonne artic pulls up. Your claim
appears to be that if only the cyclist had looked round and seen it
coming, the artic would have - what? exploded? gone a different way?
turned into a harmless butterfly?

I think you've rather missed the point.

What if you were to let the lorry go, before you set off?

Eh? How does that keep it away from me? I'm still waiting to find
out how looking round repels HGVs

Quoted message said:

it's not going to happen often is it,

You must inhabit different roads to me. I often share roads with
HGVs, and have never found looking at them an effective means of
repelling their approach.

Quoted message said:

and the risk is rather high if you do set off at the same time. Do
you think that others should do your thinking for you?

I really don't know what you're trying to say here?

First of all you seem to think looking round will miraculously make
HGVs remain at a distance, and now you've somehow drawn the conclusion
that I think others should think for me. I have no idea whatsoever
how you've come to that conclusion. Presumably, it's just that you
don't like people highlighting what compete rubbish you're spouting
('keep HGVs away by looking at them'😉 so have decided to be abusive to
try and distract from it.

I think you must be posting answers to something someone else has
said, but doing it while quoting me. Your posting seems to bear no
real relation to what I said, or what you've quoted.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Geraint Jones wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

But one cyclist who was pulled over and fined did not agree.

"I still think it's perfectly safe to do what I did," she said.

Blimey, could have been a motorist.

Tom Crispin said:

Tony Raven said:

In London two cyclists were killed jumping red lights over the four
years from 2001-5. A further three were killed over the same period
crossing on a green light and being hit by a motor vehicle running a red
light.
Source: TfL

That sounds like risk compensation in play.

A cyclist crossing on red is going to pay more attention to motorists
than a cyclist crossing on green, thus they are safer.

As for the motorists, their only concern is to reach the rear of the
next traffic jam as soon as possible, and pay little or no attention
to passing cyclists.

Do remember that many motorists are not idiots. In my experience,
somewhere close to 99% of motorists treat cyclists with respect. I grant
you, the other 1% are lobotomized eejits who should be encouraged to
apply for Darwin Awards.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Lincoln City 0-2 Southend United (AET)
Swansea City 2-2 Southend United
We went up twice with Tilly and Brush

Tom Crispin said:

On Thu, 24 May 2007 15:42:23 +0100, Daniel Barlow <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Tom Crispin said:

A feeder lane into an ASL box is a mandatory feature and is the only
legal way for a cyclists to enter an ASL box when the lights are red.

This is true, but not understood by all the people who paint roads.
I've definitely seen ASLs without feeders (though I don't know if the
one in discussion here was such)

FWIW, I feel no guilt or shame in entering the ASL by any safe and
convenient route whether legal or not. A two-foot feeder lane is a kludge.

Sometimes there's no other way into the reservoir other than to break
the law.

http://www.johnballcycling.org.uk/photos/junct

This junction in south London has a (pathetic) feeder lane in the
north ASL reservoir, but appears not to have one in the south ASL
reservoir. Also interesting to note is that there is an optional
cycle lane on the west aproach, which ends about 20m short of the
junction. It's not clear if there is an ASL reservoir at the west
junction.

Where is the junction shown in the picture?

In article <1hypu6q.8lck24b3qg0pN%
[email hidden]>, Ekul Namsob
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Do remember that many motorists are not idiots. In my experience,
somewhere close to 99% of motorists treat cyclists with respect.

That still leaves plenty who might squash you.

Rob Morley said:

In article <1hypu6q.8lck24b3qg0pN%
[email hidden]>, Ekul Namsob
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Do remember that many motorists are not idiots. In my experience,
somewhere close to 99% of motorists treat cyclists with respect.

That still leaves plenty who might squash you.

Hence the bit of my post that you snipped.

Luke

--
Lincoln City 0-2 Southend United (AET)
Swansea City 2-2 Southend United
We went up twice with Tilly and Brush

Tom Crispin said:

That sounds like risk compensation in play.

A cyclist crossing on red is going to pay more attention to motorists
than a cyclist crossing on green, thus they are safer.

Green means proceed with caution. Anyone (cyclist or otherwise) who is
'safer' jumping a red light isn't using the road safely when he goes on
green.

--
Wally
www.wally.myby.co.uk
Call me a saint, call me a sinner - just don't call me... late for
dinner.

Wally said:

Tom Crispin said:

That sounds like risk compensation in play.

A cyclist crossing on red is going to pay more attention to motorists
than a cyclist crossing on green, thus they are safer.

Green means proceed with caution. Anyone (cyclist or otherwise) who is
'safer' jumping a red light isn't using the road safely when he goes on
green.

No. Green means drop the clutch, floor the accelerator and beat everyone
else to the next lights.

Cheers,
Luke

--
Lincoln City 0-2 Southend United (AET)
Swansea City 2-2 Southend United
We went up twice with Tilly and Brush