Jonfon Woss

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:58:20 +0000 someone who may be
[email hidden] (Andy Hewitt) wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

all I am
trying to point out is that cyclists are not the saints of the road, not
by a long way.

I don't think anyone has claimed otherwise. In another thread a
(dead) cyclist is being described as a [censored].

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

Ian Smith said:

double-yellows lining the access. These are more frequently BMWs and
chelsea tractors than other groups (I have counted, on occasion).

Unless you weight this for the overall proportion of BMWs/chelsea
tractors to other vehicles in the area, it doesn't tell you an awful
lot.

The worst driving I have seen in central London (the CC zone, more or
less), in my experience, is usually from taxi drivers. But then, most
of the road users in central London are taxi drivers, so if their
driving skills are collectively merely average[*] it's still not
surprising that there should be more of them doing stupid things than
of anyone else.

-dan

[*] and standardly deviant, yes

--
"please make sure that the person is your friend before you confirm"

in message <[email hidden]>, Andy Hewitt

(') said:

One thing I do find obvious though, and this is also by frequenting
news groups that are used by car, cycle and motorcycle users, is that
each group of road users believes they are always in the right.

I think, rather, the people in each group (and the many people who at
different times are in all those groups) who don't feel that 'their'
group is always in the right (or the 'other' group always wrong) don't
feel the need to post about it.

What is certain is that there is a hierarchy of vulnerability with a
chieftain tank somewhere near the top and a pedestrian somewhere near
the bottom, and on that hierarchy the higher you are the greater the
consequences of misbehaviour and consequently the greater the
obligation, IMHO, to behave well. A cyclist who rides carelessly is
unlikely to kill anyone but himself; a chelsea tractor operator who
drives carelessly is highly likely to kill other people. Consequently,
I would suggest, the cyclists behaviour is less culpable.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
"This young man has not the faintest idea how socialists think and does
not begin to understand the mentality of the party he has been elected
to lead. He is quite simply a liberal"
-- Ken Coates MEP (Lab) of Tony Blair

I said:

Quoted message said:

I quite often see motorists go through lights that have been red for
some time, particularly at pedestrian crossing. I very seldom see
*adult* cyclists going through red lights.

and Andy Hewitt responded:

Quoted message said:

I can see that this is going to be a circular argument...

You're quite right, of course. As long as your experience and my
experience differ, we're bound to draw different conclusions based on
our experience :-)

Quoted message said:

One thing I do find obvious though, and this is also by frequenting news
groups that are used by car, cycle and motorcycle users, is that each
group of road users believes they are always in the right.

I don't frequent motoring or motorcycling ng's, but this belief is not
apparent to me in urc.

--
Danny Colyer (the UK company has been laughed out of my reply address)
<URL:http://www.speedy5.freeserve.co.uk/danny/>
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Andy Hewitt said:

Ian Smith said:

Whenever I've actually counted, I've seen more cars jumping red lights
than bicycles (I see somewhere between one and three cars jump a red
every day, and maybe one bicycle a month), and I see more cars with
illegal lighting than bicycles (though that's much closer - typicaly
up to 2 bikes a day, versus up to 5 or so cars).

As a percentage I think you're wrong there.

As it happens, today I counted.

I saw one car go through a genuinely red light (ie, not amber - I
didn't count them). I saw no cycles go through a red. I myself went
through an amber which changed just before I crossed the line, but
then so did the car about 100 yds behind me who was doing about the
same speed (25mph or so) (in fact, he may have gone through on red,
but I was looking forwards at the time, so can't say for certain).

I saw seven cars with faulty lights. I saw one bicycle with faulty
lights.

I saw 2.5 bicycles on the pavement. The .5 was aged about 4, was
going at about brisk walking pace and frankly anyone that says he
should have been on teh commuter-racetrack-A-road alongside really
doesn't belong in society. One of the remaining 2 was his mother
accompanying him, teh other was also the bike without lights.

Conversely, I saw one HGV driving on teh pavement. A fully laden
brick-lorry with fully laden trailer. Given teh choice between two
cyclists and 40 tonnes of HGV, I know which I'd rather be sharing teh
pavement with. I also saw two cars parked on teh pavement, so
assuming they weren't helicoptered into place I actually saw as many
cases of motor-vehicle on pavement as bicycle.

The one driver who made clear eye-contact with me, then while keeping
eye-contact pulled out across the give-way line forcing me to take
evasive action to avoid a collision was driving ... a BMW.

The proportions seem about right - I don't normally see HGVs driving
on teh pavement, but I do normally see more cars going through red
lights.

Quoted message said:

I see a very high number of
cycles on the roads with only the flashing LED lights fitted. Counting
how many you see being illegal is meaningless unless you also count the
ones that are legal.

No, the number that are legal is irrelevant. The NUMBER breaking the
law is much more significant than teh proportion. Suppose your wife /
daughter / aged auntie / whatever is knocked down and killed by a
drunken, speeding driver with no licences and no insurance. Will you
really say "oh well, doesn't matter, there are lots of drivers that
aren't drunk speeding and without insurance". It is the _number_ of
cases of dangerous and illegal behaviour that matters.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Have you actually counted? Even the rabid giant newt when challenged
to actually count had to moderate his initial assertion that all
cyclists he saw jumped every red light down to a monority doing so.

Depends on what you call jumping lights. As for cars, yes a lot jump
lights immediately after they've changed red. What I see with cycles
though is a blatant disregard for the lights altogether,

So you agree that a lot of cars jump red lights, but then rationalise
away that sort of red-light-jumping as not really mattering, despite
the fact that that sort of red light jumping leads to many more deaths
and serious injuries than the cyclist red light jumping ever does. I
find that a very strange point of view.

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

Daniel Barlow said:

Ian Smith said:

double-yellows lining the access. These are more frequently BMWs and
chelsea tractors than other groups (I have counted, on occasion).

Unless you weight this for the overall proportion of BMWs/chelsea
tractors to other vehicles in the area, it doesn't tell you an awful
lot.

Even round here, BMWs do not make up teh majority of road traffic.

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

Ian Smith <[email hidden]> wrote:

<Snipped Text>

Quoted message said:

No, the number that are legal is irrelevant. The NUMBER breaking the
law is much more significant than teh proportion.

Not if you want anything like an accurate statistic. How many cycles did
you see against how many cars you saw?

Quoted message said:

Suppose your wife /
daughter / aged auntie / whatever is knocked down and killed by a
drunken, speeding driver with no licences and no insurance. Will you
really say "oh well, doesn't matter, there are lots of drivers that
aren't drunk speeding and without insurance". It is the _number_ of
cases of dangerous and illegal behaviour that matters.

Erm, you're missing my point.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Have you actually counted? Even the rabid giant newt when challenged
to actually count had to moderate his initial assertion that all
cyclists he saw jumped every red light down to a monority doing so.

Depends on what you call jumping lights. As for cars, yes a lot jump
lights immediately after they've changed red. What I see with cycles
though is a blatant disregard for the lights altogether,

So you agree that a lot of cars jump red lights, but then rationalise
away that sort of red-light-jumping as not really mattering, despite
the fact that that sort of red light jumping leads to many more deaths
and serious injuries than the cyclist red light jumping ever does. I
find that a very strange point of view.

You're still missing the point. I wasn't attempting to justify anything,
breaking the law is breaking the law. The severity of the consequences
is not in question here, the evidence for who comes out worst in a
collision doesn't take any mathematics to work out. The thread was
started with apportioning blame. In that context I'm saying that it's
just possible that a lot of incidents are caused by either party.

--
Andy Hewitt ** FAF#1, (Ex-OSOS#5) - FJ1200 ABS
Honda Civic 16v: Windows free zone (Mac G5 Dual Processor)
http://www.thehewitts.plus.com

Danny Colyer said:

I said:

Quoted message said:

I quite often see motorists go through lights that have been red for
some time, particularly at pedestrian crossing. I very seldom see
*adult* cyclists going through red lights.

and Andy Hewitt responded:

Quoted message said:

I can see that this is going to be a circular argument...

You're quite right, of course. As long as your experience and my
experience differ, we're bound to draw different conclusions based on
our experience :-)

Indeed :-)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

One thing I do find obvious though, and this is also by frequenting news
groups that are used by car, cycle and motorcycle users, is that each
group of road users believes they are always in the right.

I don't frequent motoring or motorcycling ng's, but this belief is not
apparent to me in urc.

As a recent delurker here, but not to cycling, I beg to differ. There is
definitely a bias in all these groups. I'd be more surprised if there
wasn't.

--
Andy Hewitt ** FAF#1, (Ex-OSOS#5) - FJ1200 ABS
Honda Civic 16v: Windows free zone (Mac G5 Dual Processor)
http://www.thehewitts.plus.com

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:35:16 +0000, [email hidden] (Andy

Hewitt) said:

http://www.thehewitts.plus.com

Myrtle? That's a car's name!

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

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Just zis Guy said:

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 20:35:16 +0000, [email hidden] (Andy

Hewitt) said:

http://www.thehewitts.plus.com

Myrtle? That's a car's name!

LOL, aye, and we have a Harry too ;-)

--
Andy Hewitt ** FAF#1, (Ex-OSOS#5) - FJ1200 ABS
Honda Civic 16v: Windows free zone (Mac G5 Dual Processor)
http://www.thehewitts.plus.com

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 22:24:01 +0000, Andy Hewitt <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Depends on what you call jumping lights. As for cars, yes a lot jump

lights immediately after they've changed red. What I see with cycles

Quoted message said:

though is a blatant disregard for the lights altogether,

Where's the distinction in that? I regularly see up to 3 cars in succession
run a red light, how is that any less illegal, less blatant, or more
importantly perhaps, less dangerous, than cyclists running red lights?
When my lights turn green if I'm at the front of the queue I have to check
very carefully that a car, or quite often a bus, jumping a red light isn't
going to plough into me, and I'm posting as a motorist. Much as I don't want
to injure another human, no matter how foolhardy, a cyclist presents little
danger to me as a motorist, another car or a bus is a different matter.
Not only that but it's bloody selfish to make other traffic wait during
their green phase while blatantly running a red. A classic example of
this was on Saturday where two lanes merge, this merging controlled by
lights. My lane was making little progress and I could see why: each time
the other lanes lights turned red 2 or 3 cars (and only cars) just carried
on and latched onto the tailback ahead meaning when my lanes lights turned
green we found the way blocked. This is not atypical IME.

Pete

Andy Hewitt said:

Ian Smith <[email hidden]> wrote:

<Snipped Text>

Quoted message said:

No, the number that are legal is irrelevant. The NUMBER breaking the
law is much more significant than teh proportion.

Not if you want anything like an accurate statistic. How many cycles did
you see against how many cars you saw?

"statistic" does not necessitate percentage. An absolute value can be
a statistic as much as a percentage, fraction, or other way of
expressing a value.

In this case, what is relevant IS the NUMBER, not the proportion - for
example, if the number of drivers driving dangerously increased, that
would be relevant, but if the number driving dangerously stayed teh
same, but the number driving safely increased, it would not have
become any safer to go out on teh road.

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

In message <[email hidden]>, Danny Colyer
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Andy Hewitt said:

Depends on what you call jumping lights. As for cars, yes a lot jump
lights immediately after they've changed red. What I see with cycles
though is a blatant disregard for the lights altogether, I have seen a
large number of cyclists simply carry on riding through red lights.

I quite often see motorists go through lights that have been red for
some time, particularly at pedestrian crossing. I very seldom see
*adult* cyclists going through red lights.

And I was just observing on my way to work this morning that a cyclist's
age or sex appeared to have no bearing on their propensity to go through
red lights, or across pedestrian crossings while pedestrians were using
them.

--
congokid
Good restaurants in London? Number one on Google
http://congokid.com

In news:[email hidden],

David Martin said:

On 28/11/04 11:01 pm, in article
[email hidden], "Andy Hewitt"

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I mean, it is bl***dy obvious that a cyclist is probably not going
to fly over a parked car and if you want to overtake in the same
lane then you should anticipate the cyclist following an
appropriate line.

Why? Surely it is safer for the cyclist to make sure that it is
clear to move out first!

AS a cyclist you will be travelling in an appropriate position on the
road? That is not in the gutter.. I tend to find that there is
absolutely no trouble with the following traffic as:

1. I do not hug the kerb then dart out to pass parked cars
2. I make it clear that the lane is mine and they are 'overtaking'
and have to do an overtaking manouveur, irrespective of whether there
are parked cars or not.

Basic road craft. If you are in the stream of traffic you don't have
to signal.

..d

Agreed. After all, the alternative is to assume that the cyclist is going to
stop behind any parked vehicle, and wait until all the cars have come past
before overtaking. Nevertheless, I still check behind, and may signal if I
feel uncertain about the following road user.
Ps, I made a typo on that originally, and typed "ctclist". This could
describe a particular type of road user. Me, for instance.
--

Martin Bulmer

Martin Bulmer said:

Ps, I made a typo on that originally, and typed "ctclist". This could
describe a particular type of road user. Me, for instance.

As opposed to Londoners who could be CycLCCists

Julesh

Ian Smith said:

Even round here, BMWs do not make up teh majority of road traffic.

Thobut the 3-series (aka "Yuppie Cortina"😉 now outsells mid-size repmobiles
like the Vectra and Mondeblob by a considerable margin.

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
World Domination?
Just find a world that's into that kind of thing, then chain to the
floor and walk up and down on it in high heels. (Mr. Sunshine)

http://www.ardice.com/Recreation/Autos/Makes_and_Models/BMW/3_Series