Cycling wrong way up one way streets to be made legal



POHB wrote:
> or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2073117/Cyclists-allowed-wrong-way-up-one-way-streets.html
>
> http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/driving/news/article4061323.ece
>
> There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
> this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.


That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.
 
Nick wrote:
> POHB wrote:
>> or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>>
>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2073117/Cyclists-allowed-wrong-way-up-one-way-streets.html
>>
>>
>> http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/driving/news/article4061323.ece
>>
>>
>> There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
>> this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.

>
> That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
> that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
> law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
> it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.


I heard the Today piece on R4. The guy from the CTC took a moderate
pragmatic line. Tiff Needell (sp?), arguing against, was a typical
racing driver. He talked of the danger of closing speeds of 40 or 50mph.
The CTC guy had to point out that on the sort of roads in the trial cars
were travelling more slowly than bikes!

Colin
 
In news:[email protected],
Colin Blackburn <[email protected]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:

> I heard the Today piece on R4. The guy from the CTC took a moderate
> pragmatic line. Tiff Needell (sp?), arguing against, was a typical
> racing driver. He talked of the danger of closing speeds of 40 or
> 50mph. The CTC guy had to point out that on the sort of roads in the
> trial cars were travelling more slowly than bikes!


I also heard it, and Needell came across as a total berk. All the evidence
suggests that he /is/ a total berk, though, so this was not entirely
unexpected.

However, I think this idea is craptacular in the extreme.

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle
than for Gary Busey to pass through the eye of a camel.
 
Dave Larrington wrote:
> In news:[email protected],
> Colin Blackburn <[email protected]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
>
>> I heard the Today piece on R4. The guy from the CTC took a moderate
>> pragmatic line. Tiff Needell (sp?), arguing against, was a typical
>> racing driver. He talked of the danger of closing speeds of 40 or
>> 50mph. The CTC guy had to point out that on the sort of roads in the
>> trial cars were travelling more slowly than bikes!

>
> I also heard it, and Needell came across as a total berk. All the evidence
> suggests that he /is/ a total berk, though, so this was not entirely
> unexpected.
>
> However, I think this idea is craptacular in the extreme.
>

I was listening to Jo Goode on radio London. The guy I heard was from
the council. Obviously he wasn't trained in politics or talking on the
radio as he came across as a reasonable person.
 
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:27:49 -0700 (PDT), POHB <[email protected]>
wrote:

>or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>
>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2073117/Cyclists-allowed-wrong-way-up-one-way-streets.html
>
>http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/driving/news/article4061323.ece
>
>There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
>this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.


Seems to have stirred up the anti cycle brigade into even more mouth
foaming comments.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org
 
On Jun 4, 11:14 am, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:27:49 -0700 (PDT), POHB <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.

>
> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2073117/Cyclists-allowed-wrong-way-up...

>
> >http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/driving/news/arti...

>
> >There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
> >this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.

>
> Seems to have stirred up the anti cycle brigade into even more mouth
> foaming comments.
>
> --
> (\__/)  M.
> (='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
> (")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
> posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
> everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
> Seehttp://improve-usenet.org


Why in the name of left-handed Greek buggery have they asked "Captain
Gatso" to comment?


http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol...Submitted=true
 
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:27:49 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be POHB
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London. [snip]
>
>There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
>this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.


There have been streets like this in Edinburgh for years. Most are
quiet streets with not many vehicles. They are not one-way, they are
two-way but with motorists prohibited from entering at one end. The
only signs that I have noticed are the entry restrictions at one
end. There is an island at that end, though the idiots who came up
with the streetscape manual wanted to remove these as they claimed
they were not good looking. There is an official name for this sort
of thing, something like a motor vehicle plug. There are one or two
streets which are busier, one-way for motorists and two-way for
cyclists. These have extensive signs, paint and so on.

Both are generally no great problem for cyclists, though some
motorists appear as idiotic as some television presenters.

I have seen similar streets in other towns.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 10:09:47 +0100 someone who may be "Dave
Larrington" <[email protected]> wrote this:-

>I also heard it, and Needell came across as a total berk.


Indeed. He spoke of "splatting a cyclist" and this was not
questioned by the presenter. I wonder if they would have done the
same thing had a guest spoken of "splatting a politician",
"splatting a pedestrian", "splatting a journalist" and so on. I
suspect that in such a case the presenter would have immediately
intervened to ask the guest to withdraw the remark and made a big
issue of it.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
On Jun 4, 9:27 am, POHB <[email protected]> wrote:
> or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2073117/Cyclists-allowed-wrong-way-up...
>
> http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/driving/news/arti...
>
> There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
> this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.


While there are some one way streets that you might need to cycle up
but then have to make a huge detour to get back to the other end e.g
High Street here:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&h...1.653855,-0.393083&spn=0.002922,0.007038&z=17

in the majority of cases it isn't really a problem and if worst comes
to worst you can always get off and walk.

But why can't the politicians do something about pedal reflectors re
clipless pedals and recumbents? It's akin to still not having changed
the law prohibiting more than a few pints of petrol being kept in a
container to exclude car fuel tanks.

Tim.
 
On 4 Jun, 09:47, Colin Blackburn <[email protected]> wrote:
> Nick wrote:
> > POHB wrote:
> >> or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.

>
> >>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2073117/Cyclists-allowed-wrong-way-up...

>
> >>http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/driving/news/arti...

>
> >> There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
> >> this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.

>
> > That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
> > that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
> > law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
> > it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.

>
> I heard the Today piece on R4. The guy from the CTC took a moderate
> pragmatic line. Tiff Needell (sp?), arguing against, was a typical
> racing driver. He talked of the danger of closing speeds of 40 or 50mph.
> The CTC guy had to point out that on the sort of roads in the trial cars
> were travelling more slowly than bikes!
>
> Colin- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


A closing speed of 40mph wouldn't be unreasonable
 
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:40:19 +0100, Nick wrote:
> That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
> that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
> law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
> it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.


So why is pot still illegal?
 
Dervin wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:40:19 +0100, Nick wrote:
>> That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
>> that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
>> law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
>> it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.

>
> So why is pot still illegal?


As I said this guy was clearly not trained in politics.

But AIUI one puff of cannabis turns you into a Heroin addict which
requires you to mug old women in order to get money for your next fix. I
imagine it also makes you into a paedophile too.

Well Skunk does, obviously its completely different from the weed we
smoked when we were kids.
 
On 4 Jun, 13:57, Dervin <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:40:19 +0100, Nick wrote:
> > That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
> > that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
> > law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
> > it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.

>
> So why is pot still illegal?


and breaking the speed limit?
 
On 4 Jun, 11:26, spindrift <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Jun 4, 11:14 am, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:27:49 -0700 (PDT), POHB <[email protected]>
> > wrote:

>
> > >or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.

>
> > >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2073117/Cyclists-allowed-wrong-way-up....

>
> > >http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/driving/news/arti....

>
> > >There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
> > >this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.

>
> > Seems to have stirred up the anti cycle brigade into even more mouth
> > foaming comments.

>
> > --
> > (\__/)  M.
> > (='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
> > (")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
> > posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
> > everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
> > Seehttp://improve-usenet.org

>
> Why in the name of left-handed Greek buggery have they asked "Captain
> Gatso" to comment?
>
> http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol...Submitted=true- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Because he's a folk hero
 
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 06:36:09 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email protected]> said in
<b8e85480-8a82-4949-8489-986eb0de5846@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>:

>> > when you have a
>> > law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
>> > it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.

>> So why is pot still illegal?


>and breaking the speed limit?


You missed the bit about "obvious negative consequences".

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
 
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 06:37:55 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email protected]> said in
<de63be8d-a76b-440b-8d7a-8664da1f2fb7@z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>:

>> Why in the name of left-handed Greek buggery have they asked "Captain
>> Gatso" to comment?


>Because he's a folk hero


FSVO hero, and indeed folk.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
 
On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 06:36:09 -0700, Sir Jeremy wrote:

> On 4 Jun, 13:57, Dervin <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:40:19 +0100, Nick wrote:
>> > That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
>> > that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
>> > law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
>> > it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.

>>
>> So why is pot still illegal?

>
> and breaking the speed limit?


There's a reason for speed limits. To reduce fuel emissions.
 
"spindrift" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:26e5a277-daca-4106-a6a3-db8be5de7499@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

>Why in the name of left-handed Greek buggery have they asked "Captain
>Gatso" to comment?


Cos he's such an obvious numpty it makes the proposal look all the better.

If the writers of the piece had wanted to make it look bad, they'd have had
somebody from Rospa or some other such body to oppose it, but instead they
want to support it so they choose their contributors appropriately.

That or they just want to start an argument and don't actually care about
the proposal.

cheers,
clive
 

Similar threads

C
Replies
59
Views
2K
C