Jon Senior <jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote in message news:<
[email protected]>...
> Don't be so sure. My folks live 18miles from there!
I'll keep an eye out for a (scotsman?) clad in lycra carrying a stick
and eyeing up front wheels suspiciously then! ;-)
> Advanced Stop Line. Forms a box with a picture of a bike in it
Ah yes, car parking spaces...
> Not totally sure that I understand the description
Entire road of cars parked at 9am, mixture of red and green lights
along the route, just cycle down the side of the row regardless of the
colour of the lights as they're not going to be going anywhere and
it'd be daft to keep stoppign when you're the onl thing moving?
> My experience of it, is that it makes junctions considerably less
> predictable. If red no longer means stop, how do you tell drivers that a
> pedestrian has right of way?
Say to drivers "pedestrians have right of way", then nick 'em if they
don't abide by it. Also nick 'em if they park in the ASL boxes and
nick the cyclists if they jump reds. We pay for cameras now though,
not traffic police, so it won't happen. They already think that zebra
crossing are guidelines here, so the way to go about things is to step
into the road and look 'em straight in the eye until they stop. (note:
this does not work for taxis/7.5t trucks/vans, different rules apply
there)
Junctions need not be preictable if you're filtering through on red
becasue you're either the only one there or the only one still moving
and everything else is parked. You seem to be assumign a busy junction
or filtering into moving traffic - no, jsut when its empty and the
light is pointless or when super-busy and nothing else can move.
My assumption is that people can/will go at any minute from any
direction, and working on that basis its not often wrong; or when it
is its wrong for the better. Don't the dutch have no signals or
markings of any description that mean just this - and that people have
to pay attention/think and have found a reduction in accidents
comapred to the UK traffic lights and lanes and this and that and
t'other?
> While I'm sure that you pay the greatest
> attention when jumping reds; since you don't have priority, if you are
> hit, it is your fault.
Aye; cars kill other people, bikes kill their riders (or very
occasionally a ped if you're being really stupid or they're being
really careless), seems fair to me. As I'll only go when its safe to
do so (ie - when the traffic is stationary or there is none), I don't
get hit. Quite simple...
> It doesn't really further the cause for those of
> us who want to see bikes publically recognised as a legitimate form of
> transport, and it promotes the idea amongst non-cyclists that cyclists
> can't be trusted to follow the rules of the road, and thus deserve less
> respect.
Equally, cars, trucks, buses, and especially taxis or white vans
deserve little respect - they're as bad for following rules of the
road aor attentiveness/care. The respect goes something along the
lines of "that's mroe likely to kill me than me him, therefore he gets
respect". Human nature is fundamentally self-centred, and its just
made worse when you put drivers into wheeled penis-extensions. Don't
think rules of the road come into th respect thign much myself.
(besides - rules of the road require traffic police not cameras...)
> Yup.
I'm just a car driver in disguise, prolly explains the differing
viewpoint!
