Incident and police response



R

Rog

Guest
"Paul Boyd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> Rog said the following on 21/02/2008 23:50:
>
>> Any particular reason you were not using the (expensive) cycle track?

>
> From the OP, I got the impression that there wasn't one. "I realised that
> there is no cycle path at that point, it starts about 300m farther on" is
> the clue.
>
> --
> Paul Boyd
> http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/


Well, Paul, 'only when I got home' shows he was not using the cycle path at
any point.
From a fellow cyclist I can honestly say you are the most miserable bunch I
could meet on any cycle path.
In the past you have been very helpful to me but if you think me a troll
then i'll stick around and be a pain.
Horses and bikes need to be kept away from heavy traffic, and in my case I
don't begrudge paying taxes to build cycle paths and use them if possible.
Get stuffed
Rog
 
A

Andy Leighton

Guest
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 12:36:52 -0000, Rog <[email protected]> wrote:
> Horses and bikes need to be kept away from heavy traffic,


Why?

--
Andy Leighton => [email protected]
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
 
T

Trevor A Panther

Guest
"Rog" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
>
>
>
> "Paul Boyd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> Rog said the following on 21/02/2008 23:50:
>>
>>> Any particular reason you were not using the (expensive) cycle track?

>>
>> From the OP, I got the impression that there wasn't one. "I realised that
>> there is no cycle path at that point, it starts about 300m farther on" is
>> the clue.
>>
>> --
>> Paul Boyd
>> http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/

>
> Well, Paul, 'only when I got home' shows he was not using the cycle path at
> any point.
> From a fellow cyclist I can honestly say you are the most miserable bunch I
> could meet on any cycle path.
> In the past you have been very helpful to me but if you think me a troll
> then i'll stick around and be a pain.
> Horses and bikes need to be kept away from heavy traffic, and in my case I
> don't begrudge paying taxes to build cycle paths and use them if possible.
> Get stuffed
> Rog
>


" bikes need to be kept away from heavy traffic,"

What total poppycock!

your view is at variance with an awful lot of people who post regularly on
here.

I cycle between 4 and 5000 miles every year and, without knowing exactly,. I
suspect that well over 90 % of that mileage (and kilometerage too) is on road.
One of my regular shopping runs is a 5+ mile trip on the A630 into Doncaster
and it is a very busy road from 7:00 am in the morning through to after 9:00
pm at night.. There actually isn't a cycle path on the whole run and the last
couple of miles is on an urban dual carriage way. Going towards town I use
secondary position ( I generally line up in the left hand wheel track but once
on the dual carriage way I am firmly in the primary position. I have no
problem in traffic although I regularly get shouted at by some bone head on my
journey.

Going North out of Doncaster there are a series of various kinds of "cycle
path" which are very typical of the sort of facilities I have encountered in
England

1. The painted white line on a pavement - which are impossibly dangerous to
use because of wandering pedestrians -- in fact if one uses one -- it is
quicker to walk and push your bike

2. White painted line, with red painted "cycle path" -- no different to 1
since pedestrians ignore it!

3. The cycle path parallel with the main road and sharing the pedestrian
route but on a slightly different level ( may be a couple of inches). These
are very nearly as bad as to white paint lines since pedestrians wander all
over them. Additionally one has to give way at every driveway, petrol station,
shop entrance and of course every road junction. Some of these are traffic
light controlled but there are always 2 sets of lights to cross every junction
and these are in opposition -- so that if you actually obey the lights you
have to stop for 2 reds every time! Total PIA and useless , glass strewn ( it
is never swept up and slowly gets ground into dust over several months).

3. There is also a local section of the Pennine way which I use occasionally
but not in the winter since it becomes an 8 mile mud bath. Like all urban
cycle tracks it is heavily abused , littered with urban rubbish, plastic and
broken glass bottles, supermarket trolley and frequented by the unlicensed
motor bikes, mopeds and quad bikes, churning up the unmaintained route --
weekends it is downright dangerous and week days one has to cope with the
many "Oh he won't hurt you" uncontrolled mutts snapping at your heels.

Is there any wonder that I am still a "road runner" in my 71st year!

--
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom.
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
 
T

Tom Anderson

Guest
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008, Nigel Cliffe wrote:

> burtthebike wrote:
>> "Tom Anderson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:p[email protected]
>>> On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, burtthebike wrote:
>>>
>>>> The police have just left! Two of them, they took a statement,
>>>> gave me the option of having them pursue it to court, which I
>>>> declined in favour of them having a stern word with him.
>>>
>>> When you say "having a stern word with him", do you mean "giving him
>>> a police caution"? If not, that may be unpleasant for him, but is
>>> pretty much letting him of the hook. The latter, on the other hand,
>>> won't lead to any actual punishment in this case, but will remain on
>>> his criminal record, which means that if he does something like this
>>> again, he's going to get in proper trouble, and that's something
>>> that might actually have an effect on his behaviour.

>>
>> Let's be realistic here: no witnesses, no actual harm caused, very
>> little prospect of a conviction if it came to court. Given the lack
>> of evidence, the proposed action is probably the best that can be
>> hoped for under the circs, and certainly better than the police
>> simply ignoring it, which seems to have happened many times before,
>> so let's give credit where it's due.

>
> I think you are being reasonable. Had the police tried to build a case,
> chances are that the lack of witnesses would result in CPS refusing to take
> the case to court. Or when you get there, the defence barrister making out
> that all cyclists are looneys trying to get themselves killed when not using
> the cycle lane* and reported as such in the local paper.
>
> However, AFAIK, a Police Caution does not require the officers to convince
> the CPS of the merits of the case. And it stays on the books, so if the
> muppet comes up again on another charge the Caution appears when another
> officer looks into things.


Exactly. Burt, i agree that there isn't enough evidence to go to court,
even to go to a magistrate for a court caution, but if the guy's admitted
to the police that he did it, a police caution is exactly the right thing
to do.

tom

--
dream warrior, sun dancer
 
D

Dylan Smith

Guest
On 2008-02-22, Rog <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Paul Boyd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
>> Rog said the following on 21/02/2008 23:50:


>>> Any particular reason you were not using the (expensive) cycle track?


> Well, Paul, 'only when I got home' shows he was not using the cycle path at
> any point.
> Horses and bikes need to be kept away from heavy traffic, and in my case I
> don't begrudge paying taxes to build cycle paths and use them if possible.


In my experience, where there is heavy traffic, traffic is moving slower
than a cyclist. In any case, a cyclist *is* traffic.

You assert that the cycle track was "expensive" - what is this based on?
Last time I went to the UK, the cycle facilities I saw were anything but
expensive, in the main they were shared with pedestrians and marked with
cheap paint.

The original poster indicated he was travelling at some speed, over 30
mph. Is the appropriate place for a cyclist travelling at this speed
mixing with pedestrians moving at 10% of this speed? The shared pavement
is not suitable for cycle speeds more than about 5mph, which makes the
bike pretty useless for transport.

I'm so glad I live where I do - these attitudes certainly don't prevail
here.

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
 
I

Ian Smith

Guest
On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:31:48 -0000, boulder <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]


> > can't be anything to do with me. Wrong! A car pulls alongside, the driver
> > winds down the passenger window and tells me to "effing get on the effing
> > cycle path".

>
> I share his views.
> I just don't get why you are all so militant and persecuted.


So, you're saying a cyclists deserves to be physically assaulted for
not riding on a non-existent cycle path?

> I ride a bike and drive a car, and you need to compromise whilst
> doing both.


You should not need top accept physical assault doing either.

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

Paul Boyd

Guest
On 22/02/2008 17:22, Dylan Smith said,

> I'm so glad I live where I do - these attitudes certainly don't prevail
> here.


As far as I can tell, this rabid anti-cycling attitude seems to be
almost unique to mainland UK. I have no idea why, but the media do seem
to have a feeding frenzy every time a cyclist has a minor digression, or
even if they don't. If they're going to do that I wish they would be
less biased and show the same attitude towards motorists. But then,
there would be no room in their papers.

My brother lives in Haarlem, Netherlands, and although he isn't a
cyclist himself he sees a huge difference in the way cyclists are
treated over there compared to here.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
?

_

Guest
On 22 Feb 2008 17:32:11 GMT, Ian Smith wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:31:48 -0000, boulder <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> "burtthebike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]

>
>>> can't be anything to do with me. Wrong! A car pulls alongside, the driver
>>> winds down the passenger window and tells me to "effing get on the effing
>>> cycle path".

>>
>> I share his views.
>> I just don't get why you are all so militant and persecuted.

>
> So, you're saying a cyclists deserves to be physically assaulted for
> not riding on a non-existent cycle path?
>
>> I ride a bike and drive a car, and you need to compromise whilst
>> doing both.

>
> You should not need top accept physical assault doing either.
>


I think this is a case of "put your brain away, 'boulder', you're not going
to use it anyway..."
 
S

Simon Brooke

Guest
Rog wrote:

> Horses and bikes need to be kept away from heavy traffic


Why, and for whose benefit?

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GP/CS s++: a++ C+++ ULBVCS*++++$ L+++ P--- E+>++ W+++ N++ K w--(---)
M- !d- PS++ PE-- Y+ PGP !t 5? X+ !R b++ !DI D G- e++ h*(-) r++ y+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
 
N

NigelM

Guest
"Rog" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
> Horses and bikes need to be kept away from heavy traffic, and in my case I
> don't begrudge paying taxes to build cycle paths and use them if possible.
> Get stuffed
> Rog
>


My own opinion is that the people comrpising the heavy traffic should be
taught to keep away from cyclists and horses. As the years go by there's
going to be a hell of a lot more of us out there and no government will ever
see the profit in catering specifically for us.

Cycle provision in this country is an incompetent joke. If someone can
justify to me that a ten foot long two foot wide piece of red tarmac with
dismount signs and a tree in the middle is anything other than an exercise
in tree hugging quota meeting then I'll be persuaded.

The road is there, whether I'm riding a bike or driving a car, and I've paid
enough cash to be on it, and to be treated with the same respect as anyone
else. Anyone who is going to stop and threaten me because they can't spare
the 3 seconds it takes to hang back then pass should have that right removed
for life.
 
J

Just zis Guy, you know?

Guest
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:08:57 GMT, "NigelM"
<[email protected]> said in
<[email protected]>:

>My own opinion is that the people comrpising the heavy traffic should be
>taught to keep away from cyclists and horses.


As London indicates, the more of them there are the less of a
problem it is. They grind to a halt, we carry on unimpeded.

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
 
R

Roger Merriman

Guest
Just zis Guy, you know? <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:08:57 GMT, "NigelM"
> <[email protected]> said in
> <[email protected]>:
>
> >My own opinion is that the people comrpising the heavy traffic should be
> >taught to keep away from cyclists and horses.

>
> As London indicates, the more of them there are the less of a
> problem it is. They grind to a halt, we carry on unimpeded.
>
> Guy


does depend on the area, when i've gone back to wales, and taken the
bike i've noted how much more room and genrally careful cars are around
bikes, it's a fairly low traffic area. and very few bikes on the road.

roger
--
www.rogermerriman.com
 
T

Tom Crispin

Guest
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 07:26:37 +0000, [email protected] (Roger
Merriman) wrote:

>does depend on the area, when i've gone back to wales, and taken the
>bike i've noted how much more room and genrally careful cars are around
>bikes, it's a fairly low traffic area. and very few bikes on the road.


In France a few years back I noted how much more courteous drivers
were on the Pyrenean cols than the highways in Paris. That Pyrenean
courteousy disappeared on the coastal road from Cebere (France) to
Portbou (Spain), with English motorists amoung the most discourteous.
 
J

Just zis Guy, you know?

Guest
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 07:26:37 +0000, [email protected] (Roger
Merriman) said in <1icr4xa.1cwwkpy15lwtffN%[email protected]>:

>does depend on the area, when i've gone back to wales, and taken the
>bike i've noted how much more room and genrally careful cars are around
>bikes, it's a fairly low traffic area. and very few bikes on the road.


Ditto much of France, I think.

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
 
T

Toby Sleigh

Guest
"NigelM" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "Rog" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
>> Horses and bikes need to be kept away from heavy traffic, and in my case
>> I don't begrudge paying taxes to build cycle paths and use them if
>> possible.
>> Get stuffed
>> Rog
>>

>
> My own opinion is that the people comrpising the heavy traffic should be
> taught to keep away from cyclists and horses. As the years go by there's
> going to be a hell of a lot more of us out there and no government will
> ever see the profit in catering specifically for us.


Very sensible & sad piece in Thurs Times by Jane Shilling about driving on
country lanes
http://tinyurl.com/2rdnqc third item - Rural Peril
 
P

Paul Boyd

Guest
On 23/02/2008 11:10, Toby Sleigh said,

> Very sensible & sad piece in Thurs Times by Jane Shilling about driving on
> country lanes
> http://tinyurl.com/2rdnqc third item - Rural Peril


There's a good few of those sort of lanes round here, and frankly the
speed some drivers go is sheer lunacy. Perhaps the thought that there
might possibly be horses or cyclists or walkers doesn't enter their
minds, but surely they must realise that there might be other cars doing
the same speed in the other direction?

A while ago a main road through a local village was closed and the
official diversion was a bit bizarre, to put it mildly. So drivers used
the local lanes instead. Someone had put a hand-written sign up at one
point warning drivers to slow down because there had been 2 accidents,
no - 3 accidents. Whoops, now it's up to 4, then 5. Wouldn't you have
thought that might have rung some alarm bells? Apparently not.

--
Paul Boyd
http://www.paul-boyd.co.uk/
 
W

wafflycat

Guest
"Paul Boyd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> On 23/02/2008 11:10, Toby Sleigh said,
>
>> Very sensible & sad piece in Thurs Times by Jane Shilling about driving
>> on country lanes
>> http://tinyurl.com/2rdnqc third item - Rural Peril

>
> There's a good few of those sort of lanes round here, and frankly the
> speed some drivers go is sheer lunacy. Perhaps the thought that there
> might possibly be horses or cyclists or walkers doesn't enter their minds,
> but surely they must realise that there might be other cars doing the same
> speed in the other direction?


Yet another cyclist the victim of a hit-and-run in Norwich - article in the
local rag, the Norwich Evening News at

<http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/News/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=News&tBrand=enonline&tCategory=news&itemid=NOED22%20Feb%202008%2016%3A01%3A20%3A233>

or <http://tinyurl.com/2umbrb>

Whilst it's not exactly a frequent happening, it is happening more often
hereabouts.