police, camera, action 11:35pm tonight



A

Adam Lea

Guest
Just spotted in the TV guide:

"Presenters Alastair Stewart and Adrian Simpson reveal the dangers facing
car drivers when they overtake in the enormous blind spot areas of larger
vehicles. Plus a graphic demonstration for cyclists who fail to heed safety
advice on sharing the road with trucks and vans."

I will be interested to hear what their safety advice is.

Adam
 
On 5 Feb, 23:07, "Adam Lea" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Just spotted in the TV guide:
>
> "Presenters Alastair Stewart and Adrian Simpson reveal the dangers facing
> car drivers when they overtake in the enormous blind spot areas of larger
> vehicles. Plus a graphic demonstration for cyclists who fail to heed safety
> advice on sharing the road with trucks and vans."
>
> I will be interested to hear what their safety advice is.


Well?

What was it?

And who would take road safety advice from a drink driver anyway?

...d
 
David Martin wrote:
>
> And who would take road safety advice from a drink driver anyway?


As long as the advice was "keep out of their way..."

BugBear
 
David Martin wrote:

> "Adam Lea" <[email protected]> wrote:


>>Just spotted in the TV guide:
>>"Presenters Alastair Stewart and Adrian Simpson reveal the dangers facing
>>car drivers when they overtake in the enormous blind spot areas of larger
>>vehicles. Plus a graphic demonstration for cyclists who fail to heed safety
>>advice on sharing the road with trucks and vans."
>>I will be interested to hear what their safety advice is.


> Well?
> What was it?
> And who would take road safety advice from a drink driver anyway?


Do either of them write their own scripts?
 
On 6 Feb, 11:04, JNugent <[email protected]>
wrote:
> David Martin wrote:
> > "Adam Lea" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>Just spotted in the TV guide:
> >>"Presenters Alastair Stewart and Adrian Simpson reveal the dangers facing
> >>car drivers when they overtake in the enormous blind spot areas of larger
> >>vehicles. Plus a graphic demonstration for cyclists who fail to heed safety
> >>advice on sharing the road with trucks and vans."
> >>I will be interested to hear what their safety advice is.

> > Well?
> > What was it?
> > And who would take road safety advice from a drink driver anyway?

>
> Do either of them write their own scripts?


Nice victim blaming there, a lorry driver overtakes a cyclist and
immediately turns left, then claims the cyclist, who is dead, was
undertaking. Case closed.

Drunk driver Alistair Stewart presenting on road safety is like Gary
Glitter giving nursery advice.
 
spindrift wrote:

> JNugent <[email protected]> wrote:
>>David Martin wrote:
>>>"Adam Lea" <[email protected]> wrote:


>>>>Just spotted in the TV guide:
>>>>"Presenters Alastair Stewart and Adrian Simpson reveal the dangers facing
>>>>car drivers when they overtake in the enormous blind spot areas of larger
>>>>vehicles. Plus a graphic demonstration for cyclists who fail to heed safety
>>>>advice on sharing the road with trucks and vans."
>>>>I will be interested to hear what their safety advice is.


>>>Well?
>>>What was it?
>>>And who would take road safety advice from a drink driver anyway?


>>Do either of them write their own scripts?


> Nice victim blaming there


I didn't blame anyone for anything and neither can "Do either of them
write their own scripts?" be taken to be anything other than a
straightforward question (even if you don't like what you know the
answer to be).

Are you mad?

[There's no need to answer that.]

> a lorry driver overtakes a cyclist and
> immediately turns left, then claims the cyclist, who is dead, was
> undertaking. Case closed.


> Drunk driver Alistair Stewart presenting on road safety is like Gary
> Glitter giving nursery advice.


Do you really not understand that presenters of programmes like the
one mentioned are just faces hired to do a job and that they do not
write their own scripts?
 
"Are you mad"?

Read what was written again. The assumption is made that cyclists need
instruction, not that drivers need to take care. Assumption of guilt.


"Do you really not understand that presenters of programmes like the
one mentioned are just faces hired to do a job and that they do not
write their own scripts?"

I don't care, what difference does it make? The words are there. Don't
care who wrote them.
 
On 6 Feb, 12:38, spindrift <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Are you mad"?
>
> Read what was written again. The assumption is made that cyclists need
> instruction, not that drivers need to take care. Assumption of guilt.




Cyclists need cycle tracks away from the traffic. Problem solved.
 
On 6 Feb, 14:16, Sir Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 6 Feb, 12:38, spindrift <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "Are you mad"?

>
> > Read what was written again. The assumption is made that cyclists need
> > instruction, not that drivers need to take care. Assumption of guilt.

>
> Cyclists need cycle tracks away from the traffic. Problem solved.


No, segregation is not the answer, the roads are safer when cyclists
are where they belong, on the roads they pay for. Cycle lanes are far
more dangerous than the road.
 
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 06:16:39 -0800 (PST) someone who may be Sir
Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote this:-

>Cyclists need cycle tracks away from the traffic.


Cyclists are as much part of the traffic as motorists. Therefore
they cannot be away from it.

>Problem solved.


<http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/cfi_jaf.pdf> is a good starting
point to understand such cycle "facilities". Having read that anyone
who is interested should work through the page it came from
<http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/infrastructure.html>

If you have any sensible comments on the paper feel free to make
them, but blustering about the subject will not help your cause.


--
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
 
Sir Jeremy wrote:

> Cyclists need cycle tracks away from the traffic. Problem solved.


So just solve the problem of a completely parallel network with no need
to ever cross onto a road anywhere while still affording access to all
the same places, and once you've done that show how to fund building it,
and we're there. Easy!

And then for an encore read up on the pieces David H. has pointed you
too, should the first task actually prove a tad tricky...

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 06:16:39 -0800 (PST), Sir Jeremy wrote:

> On 6 Feb, 12:38, spindrift <[email protected]> wrote:
>> "Are you mad"?
>>
>> Read what was written again. The assumption is made that cyclists need
>> instruction, not that drivers need to take care. Assumption of guilt.

>
>
>
> Cyclists need cycle tracks away from the traffic. Problem solved.


While you're at it, why don't you dismantle the railways, as they only
encourage the poor to move about?
 
spindrift wrote:

> "Are you mad"?


> Read what was written again. The assumption is made that cyclists need
> instruction, not that drivers need to take care. Assumption of guilt.


I made no statements of any kind, whether predicated on an imaginary
assumption or not. I asked a question.

> "Do you really not understand that presenters of programmes like the
> one mentioned are just faces hired to do a job and that they do not
> write their own scripts?"


> I don't care, what difference does it make? The words are there. Don't
> care who wrote them.


If you read: "Drive carefully near cyclists and give them sufficient
room" (or any words to the same sort of general effect) in a
publication similar to the Highway Code, do you think that is:

(a) good, or
(b) bad?

If someone like Alastair Stewart reads out the scripted words: "Drive
carefully near cyclists and give them sufficient room" (or any words
to the same sort of general effect) on a television programme, do you
think that is:

(a) good, or
(b) bad?

If the answer to one is different from the answer to the other, please
explain why.
 
In article <[email protected]>, Peter Clinch wrote:
>Sir Jeremy wrote:
>
>> Cyclists need cycle tracks away from the traffic. Problem solved.

>
>So just solve the problem of a completely parallel network with no need
>to ever cross onto a road anywhere while still affording access to all
>the same places, and once you've done that show how to fund building it,
>and we're there. Easy!


There's a much easier solution. We take the existing road network,
and ban motor traffic other than emergency vehicle. Sorted.
Never being able to have anything bigger than a bike-trailer-load
delivered anywhere (other than a railway station or port) would be a bit
of a pain, as would the upheaval in employment patterns, but if it saves
just one life, think of the children, etc. etc..
 
"David Martin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:cf31e248-1231-4ace-952c-9e792eafa9cd@i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On 5 Feb, 23:07, "Adam Lea" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Just spotted in the TV guide:
>>
>> "Presenters Alastair Stewart and Adrian Simpson reveal the dangers facing
>> car drivers when they overtake in the enormous blind spot areas of larger
>> vehicles. Plus a graphic demonstration for cyclists who fail to heed
>> safety
>> advice on sharing the road with trucks and vans."
>>
>> I will be interested to hear what their safety advice is.

>
> Well?
>
> What was it?
>


Don't cycle up the inside of lorries at junctions.

The programme was about lorries and blind spots in general.
 
"spindrift" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:e490bcdc-83ea-4411-ae8c-e0229570a698@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On 6 Feb, 11:04, JNugent <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> David Martin wrote:
>> > "Adam Lea" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>Just spotted in the TV guide:
>> >>"Presenters Alastair Stewart and Adrian Simpson reveal the dangers
>> >>facing
>> >>car drivers when they overtake in the enormous blind spot areas of
>> >>larger
>> >>vehicles. Plus a graphic demonstration for cyclists who fail to heed
>> >>safety
>> >>advice on sharing the road with trucks and vans."
>> >>I will be interested to hear what their safety advice is.
>> > Well?
>> > What was it?
>> > And who would take road safety advice from a drink driver anyway?

>>
>> Do either of them write their own scripts?

>
> Nice victim blaming there, a lorry driver overtakes a cyclist and
> immediately turns left, then claims the cyclist, who is dead, was
> undertaking. Case closed.
>
> Drunk driver Alistair Stewart presenting on road safety is like Gary
> Glitter giving nursery advice.


What is wrong with advising cyclists to avoid going up the inside of lorries
at junctions?
 
On 6 Feb, 18:15, [email protected] (Alan Braggins) wrote:
>
> just one life, think of the children, etc. etc..



not to mention the bunny rabbits and the fluffy kittens
 
On 6 Feb, 15:41, David Hansen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Feb 2008 06:16:39 -0800 (PST) someone who may be Sir
> Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
> >Cyclists need cycle tracks away from the traffic.

>
> Cyclists are as much part of the traffic as motorists. Therefore
> they cannot be away from it.
>
> >Problem solved.

>
> <http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/cfi_jaf.pdf> is a good starting
> point to understand such cycle "facilities". Having read that anyone
> who is interested should work through the page it came from
> <http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/infrastructure.html>
>
> If you have any sensible comments on the paper feel free to make
> them, but blustering about the subject will not help your cause.
>
> --
>   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



If you're so keen on fighting the traffic, why is there a mass protest
going on because Bristol council want to put buses on the Bristol-Bath
railway? Surely you'd rather be on the A4 dicing with everyone else?

It seems to me that if cyclists want to be safe then they need to get
off the roads, because traffic is simply too heavy and too fast. If
cyclists kept to cycle paths such as those provided by Sustans then
they'd be alot safer. That Scottish cyclist would still be alive as
would those people foolish enough to go cycling up an icy mountain in
Wales last year.

If you want to risk your necks then by all means mix it with the
traffic just don't come whining when you end up in hospital. Your
choice.
 
Adam Lea wrote:
> Just spotted in the TV guide:
>
> "Presenters Alastair Stewart and Adrian Simpson reveal the dangers
> facing car drivers when they overtake in the enormous blind spot
> areas of larger vehicles. Plus a graphic demonstration for cyclists
> who fail to heed safety advice on sharing the road with trucks and
> vans."
> I will be interested to hear what their safety advice is.


I couldn't see this in my TV guide. What channel was it on? One of them
funny ones? I don't get Dutch Houswives 3, etc.

~PB
 
In message <b9a3206d-760d-43f1-9785-e515fa83b63e@n20g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>
Sir Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> If you're so keen on fighting the traffic, why is there a mass protest
> going on because Bristol council want to put buses on the Bristol-Bath
> railway? Surely you'd rather be on the A4 dicing with everyone else?


I often cycle on the B2B and the A4. They are completely different.
Cycling along the A4 if safer than on the B2B, but the B2B is more chilled
out.

> It seems to me that if cyclists want to be safe then they need to get
> off the roads, because traffic is simply too heavy and too fast.


If that is the case, then the problem lies with the idiot drivers that think
they own the road, and that everyone else should get out of their way e.g.
like "safespeed" and your namesake

> If
> cyclists kept to cycle paths such as those provided by Sustans then
> they'd be alot safer.


And how would I get to work, go shopping, or even get to a Sustrans path?

> That Scottish cyclist would still be alive as
> would those people foolish enough to go cycling up an icy mountain in
> Wales last year.
>
> If you want to risk your necks then by all means mix it with the
> traffic just don't come whining when you end up in hospital. Your
> choice.



Does the same apply to pedestrians trying to cross the road? What about
pedestrians have to walk in the road because the foot path is completely
blocked by parked cars, like whiteladies road was this afternoon.

Martin.
 

Similar threads

E
Replies
6
Views
263
UK and Europe
Kenneth MacKenzie
K