Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun Mar 29, 2020 10:13

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 17:24 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 12:41
Posts: 32
Location: London
There's a problem with educating stupid people. Not all stupid people are uneducated. Stupidity isn't measured on IQ, it's like a disease, not sure if it's contagious, but by the standard of most drivers in London I think it might be!!

_________________
"would go faster if it wasn't for the cars blocking the roads"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 17:40 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 18:41
Posts: 893
nanki_poo wrote:
The vast majority of schools are in built-up areas. I can see no justification for exceeding 30mph in built-up areas, especially in the vicinity of schools. IMHO anyone who thinks differently is irresponsible and dangerous.

I tried looking for COAST, but can't seem to find it. I've no doubt it is sensible, but whether it can be used as a justification for reckless driving, I can't say until I read it.

I think that we only disagree on the detail and whether to use a carrot or a stick to improve standards. FWIW, I'm shocked that anyone would think 30 mph close past a pavement full of schoolkids appropriate. You need time to react to someone's progeny stepping off the kerb and you can buy that either by travelling more slowly, further from the kerb, or both.

COAST is an acronym for arguably the five most important factors of road safety:
  • Concentration
  • Observation
  • Anticipation
  • Space, and
  • Time
If you concentrate on your driving, carefully observe your surroundings, anticipate what others might do and how hazards might develop, and give yourself enough space and time to react to those hazards before they become problems, you will automatically travel at a safe and appropriate speed for the conditions. IOW driving with proper COAST is the complete opposite to reckless driving.

_________________
Will


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 17:47 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 00:04
Posts: 2311
nanki_poo wrote:
Believe me, the 'incidents' number far far far more than that.

and I'm still waiting to hear how many, if any, of them had anything at all to do with exceeding a speed limit?

nanki_poo wrote:
Sorry, but I'm spending most of my time having constructive discussions with other people on this forum.

so establishing the real causes of danger for cyclists (as well as other road users) isn't constructive unless the answer is "speeding"?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 18:00 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 18:41
Posts: 893
johnsher wrote:
nanki_poo wrote:
Believe me, the 'incidents' number far far far more than that.

and I'm still waiting to hear how many, if any, of them had anything at all to do with exceeding a speed limit?

@nanki_poo: hopefully, you'll take this in the spirit it's meant. You've had a number of close calls and one or more collisions from - if I have understood correctly - motorists pulling out on you from side roads. As I'm a cyclist who used to suffer likewise, can I offer the same tip given to me:

Two things will minimise the risk of another incident:
  1. Ensure that you can be seen. As you approach a junction and note that someone's waiting to pull out, take up the primary riding position. Now that you're no longer "in the gutter", the waiting driver has a better chance of seeing you. The drivers behind might get a little miffed - but it's small potatoes. It's your life - so look after it. While you're in the primary riding position, following vehicles are less likely to overtake and so less likely to remove your option to pull to the crown of the road if the emerging vehicle does pull out.
  2. Be very wary of that emerging vehicle until you've made eye-contact with the driver. Doing this helps ensure (at least, give confidence) that you've been seen. The majority of incidents from pull-outs are because the driver of the emerging vehicle didn't see the other road user - so until you're reasonably confident that they've seen you, manage the hazard so that you have an escape
Perhaps I'm teaching granny to suck eggs here - if so, I apologise. However, this post is made with the best of intentions.

ATB,

_________________
Will


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 18:06 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 10:32
Posts: 29
johnsher wrote:
nanki_poo wrote:
Believe me, the 'incidents' number far far far more than that.

and I'm still waiting to hear how many, if any, of them had anything at all to do with exceeding a speed limit?

nanki_poo wrote:
Sorry, but I'm spending most of my time having constructive discussions with other people on this forum.

so establishing the real causes of danger for cyclists (as well as other road users) isn't constructive unless the answer is "speeding"?


Er... I've just had a check through and I can't find the place where I say they had TO DO with breaking the speed limit, that seems to have been your fascination.

I was merely observing the fact that so many do when they put my life at risk, and that they are risking it more by speeding when they do it. More of a connection between speeders and risk taking (at cyclist's expense).

I think you either have the wrong guy, or a chip on your shoulder. Or this is some kind of initiation.

Now, would you please leave me alone unless you want to comment on something I have actually said, please? I have a rather large mouth, but it is still difficult to put words in them.

Looking through, I notice this happens a lot on this forum, words get put into people's mouth.

I can see why the other new person was so tenderly introducing themselves now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 18:11 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 10:32
Posts: 29
willcove wrote:
johnsher wrote:
nanki_poo wrote:
Believe me, the 'incidents' number far far far more than that.

and I'm still waiting to hear how many, if any, of them had anything at all to do with exceeding a speed limit?

@nanki_poo: hopefully, you'll take this in the spirit it's meant. You've had a number of close calls and one or more collisions from - if I have understood correctly - motorists pulling out on you from side roads. As I'm a cyclist who used to suffer likewise, can I offer the same tip given to me:

Two things will minimise the risk of another incident:
  1. Ensure that you can be seen. As you approach a junction and note that someone's waiting to pull out, take up the primary riding position. Now that you're no longer "in the gutter", the waiting driver has a better chance of seeing you. The drivers behind might get a little miffed - but it's small potatoes. It's your life - so look after it. While you're in the primary riding position, following vehicles are less likely to overtake and so less likely to remove your option to pull to the crown of the road if the emerging vehicle does pull out.
  2. Be very wary of that emerging vehicle until you've made eye-contact with the driver. Doing this helps ensure (at least, give confidence) that you've been seen. The majority of incidents from pull-outs are because the driver of the emerging vehicle didn't see the other road user - so until you're reasonably confident that they've seen you, manage the hazard so that you have an escape
Perhaps I'm teaching granny to suck eggs here - if so, I apologise. However, this post is made with the best of intentions.

ATB,


That's OK. I started off doing that, then sort of laid off it a bit after someone drove up behind me and deliberately 'pushed' me out into the middle of the Old Street roundabout while a bus was coming.

However, after the collision I went back to it. Though now, people just overtake me in the 'right-turn' lane, then turn left.

I do despair of humanity sometimes. :o


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 18:25 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 00:04
Posts: 2311
nanki_poo wrote:
I was merely observing the fact that so many do when they put my life at risk, and that they are risking it more by speeding when they do it. More of a connection between speeders and risk taking (at cyclist's expense).

it still seems to me that the main danger to you (and me) is either people pulling out from junctions or turning in front of you.

nanki_poo wrote:
I can't find the place where I say they had TO DO with breaking the speed limit, that seems to have been your fascination.


I guess I must have imagined this comment as the sum total of road dangers for you then...

nanki_poo wrote:
so that I can I carry on speeding around for some sort of (probably sexual) deep-seated gratification


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 23:10 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
Bewildered wrote:
Mad Moggie.

I am flattered at the length of your response. I was expecting this to be more of as petrolhead forum, but have been pleasantly surprised by most of the threads and comments. There are however a few worrying aspects to the forum, but I think I'll stick around.

Thanks for the welcome. :)


Hi there!

Thinkl you'll find most of the regulars and our host fair minded, very much pro- road safety for all road users - howver they choose to travel.

Lot of us ride bikes, enjoy cycling and even enjoy walking.


Stick around mate and :welcome: - we discuss lots of things - agree about some, disagree about othe, agree to disagree about some stuff and yet we all manage to stay pals too. :lol: 8-)

Sure we may tease and banter - but would never knowingly insult or offend and most here are usually quick to apologise if someone does take something the wrong way too.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 23:33 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
Parrot of Doom wrote:
Well ideology is all well and good, but needs to be backed up by real improvements and not token gestures :)

Many cycle lanes in this country are useless, however there are some instances where they are valuable.



I agree there. We have some good ones here and Mad Doc does churlishly agree that there's the odd "good'un" in his patch. :lol:

But perhaps down in the South where life's a lot more urbanised - they may have problems which we Notherners are not as aware of.

Quote:
A long straight road that is busy with traffic, and that has no junctions - cycle lanes work well here as motorists tend to tailgate on such roads, and cannot see cyclists in time to avoid them. Segregating cyclists from vehicles is IMO a good idea in these instances.


:clap: And I think we have managed this to some extent in our "beacon town plans" up here in Co Durham. I think we have one or two major roads in the North which have always had an excellent facilt too...

Quote:
I think for your average inner city school this scheme might not be a workable idea, but for a small town or village school it could be excellent.



Yes .. it will work in the leafier 'burbs which are the ones which parents fight to secure places for their kids.

Inner city schools? I think they and the police are relieved when their students turn up for class. :roll: :wink:

Quote:
Ironically, education is the key, and thats what we're all arguing for anyway :)


Indeed. But I think Wildy's point was that this gesture is a rather empty one - like the "Jamie Oliver school dinner episodes" last year. Sounds a lot.. but wil not go very far and there's a big danger they robbed the "low class/teacher ratio/books and interactive whiteboard" budget to pay for cycling lessons.

I know Wildyt's Swiss teacher cousin (Jess) whom some met online on the old CSPC site - sacrificed swimming and tennis to accommodate cycling "cred" for her 11-18 students within her "sports budget"

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 23:50 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 10:32
Posts: 29
johnsher wrote:
nanki_poo wrote:
I was merely observing the fact that so many do when they put my life at risk, and that they are risking it more by speeding when they do it. More of a connection between speeders and risk taking (at cyclist's expense).

it still seems to me that the main danger to you (and me) is either people pulling out from junctions or turning in front of you.

nanki_poo wrote:
I can't find the place where I say they had TO DO with breaking the speed limit, that seems to have been your fascination.


I guess I must have imagined this comment as the sum total of road dangers for you then...

nanki_poo wrote:
so that I can I carry on speeding around for some sort of (probably sexual) deep-seated gratification


Look mate, now I can see that this is for some reason personal.

You have ignored whole posts I have made (read them yourself, that's what forums are for!!) in favour of half a sentence in a totally different context to attack me.

Tell me what your exact problem is with me, and I may reply. Otherwise not. I suspect I have been tailed here from somewhere, though I cannot think where because, frankly, I am not that dislikeable IMHO.

State your problem and let's do away with the smoke and mirrors, eh?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 23:50 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
nanki_poo wrote:
Hmmmmm.... just two questions:

mumsy taking cherub to school in a 4x4 is safer for who? The kids walking and cycling?



I think a lot of parents seem to see a potential kiddy fiddler in everyone they see.

This was not helped by Ken Livingstone trying to stop tourist photos in London lest a child was in the frame.. :roll: (August 2005 - tabloids - pounced on with full claws by Wildy who went off on one on PH Pie and Piston at the time as I understand. :wink: )

Quote:
So because there are such bad drivers on the road, kids should be discouraged from cycling? Should we not, as you say, prosecute people who break the law? i.e. drivers who speed, drive without due care and attention, etc etc etc?



These same mumpties are the ones who want a speed cam outside schools and who scream "foul" when given a COAST lecture over poor obesrvation and parking skills.


By the way - here in Durham - we use professional judgement at all times - and we prosecute possibly higher than average for really appalling driving. We fine fewer than average for speeding and we consistently have a good record on road safety as well - a record which we attribute to good leadership under past and current CC. :wink:

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 00:20 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
nanki_poo wrote:
Look mate, now I can see that this is for some reason personal.


Err, no. I don't think so. It's just a misunderstanding.

It's far too easy for misunderstandings to devlop with text based communication, and I would have thought that you had the experience to know that.

Anyway, stop it, please, both of you. The discussion is fine and there's no need for antagonism.

No apologies. No discussions. Let's just move on.

I would also remind all posters that ad hominem is banned here. Please attack the argument not the poster.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 00:27 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 10:32
Posts: 29
SafeSpeed wrote:
nanki_poo wrote:
Look mate, now I can see that this is for some reason personal.


Err, no. I don't think so. It's just a misunderstanding.

It's far too easy for misunderstandings to devlop with text based communication, and I would have thought that you had the experience to know that.

Anyway, stop it, please, both of you. The discussion is fine and there's no need for antagonism.

No apologies. No discussions. Let's just move on.

I would also remind all posters that ad hominem is banned here. Please attack the argument not the poster.


Hmmmm... sorry if I came across wrong, but ad hominem it most definitely wasn't. I will always defend myself.

Anyway, SS, where were we? :)

Driving theory, no-one ever disusses that any more. Not like the old days, even college boys like me (back then!) used to.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 00:33 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
nanki_poo wrote:
Astounding.

You actually think that because drivers cannot control their cars, children should be prevented from cycling.


It's perception.

A certain internet troll whom I am sure you may be aware of given he posts on every site you could think of :roll:

(er - I don't think he actually rides or works because of the apparent addiction to the internet as evidenced by hundreds of posts and re-registers once banned by the way. Tis how he comes across to most normal folk anyway :wink: )

But per this person who harps on as constant and at great length about cyclist deaths - inferring mainly "deliberate attempted murder" :roll: when 75% of his ramblings refer to tragedies resulting from the illegals and the joy riders whom we all want to see locked up for long periods. Banning for life.. well yes.. but these people did not have licences in the first place. If we are patrolling in full force and using copper's noses and intelligence .. then we can at least try to use strategic police tactics to nail them before they cause a KSI A cam ain't going to help here. :roll:

But by constantly claiming this.. the person would make people think twice. I know my own wife read his ramblings with me whilst I was online once. Her reaction was to remonstrate with me over my allowing our youngest two to ride their bikes to school. Took me a whole week of riding with her and our youngest to prove to her that our kids are road wise and Durham drivers are fairly normal and rational and so our youngest are relatively safe here. :wink:

But if the guy can do that to a clearly informed woman like my own wife.. then what is he doing to other people? And it's not just him.. picking up readers' letters in the mags and Mad Doc's post relaiting to a letter in Manchester and Bolton press which recount anecdotes of drivers hurling missiles and so on at cyclists.. it does not help.


As Nick Ross says on "Crimewatch" - such incidents are not the norm and I will say that if this happens to anyone lurking, browsing - whatever - then you MUST report and give as much detail as possible so that we can nail these rather pathetic inadequates in our society. :furious: We may not be able to produce an immediate "white rabbit out of a top hat" - but we can use this intelligence to try to apprehend such chavs.

Quote:

Bad driving has nothing to do with any 'ethos' except for the arrogance of people who think that everyone should drive cars to protect themselves, and if they don't they essentially deserve it if they die. :?


When we risk assess a hazard based on our observations and subsequent pereception of a potential hazard, we make a driving/biking/cycling plan to minimise or even zero-ise the danger on the road.

It's called applying common sense at all times - driving to the road condition and continually adjusting your plan of action according to the set of circumstances you observe unfolding ahead of you, behind you and to each side of you - and your anticipation of what could happen should you take no action.

Quote:

I have no children, but recall walking and cycling to school throughout my childhood, between one and six miles!!!



I've children at university and two still at school. They do as I did as a boy.. mix a walk, a bike ride and a bus ride and just occasionally either myslef or Alice will drop off at bus stop or even within a 5 minute walk to the school gate deependent on our family plans for the day.
Quote:

I think some on here might need to take deep breaths after hearing those heady distances...


Pah ... my daily ride to school was over 10 miles! Yer don't yer born! :lol: :wink:

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Clunk!
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 00:44 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 10:32
Posts: 29
Ah! I just caught on in the re-reading of details that this is a northern forum.

You are right, the scenario is totally different. I know this, being one myself (though admittedly only as far 'North' as the midlands).

South of the border (Watford Gap) I was truly shocked. I never ever ever believed that a driver would ever actually aim at you. Until I moved to London.

I totally understand now. My brother is in the midlands, and drives all over the country. He just cannot understand London.

I don't blame him. On the roads, it is irrational. You really have to live it to believe it.

Not sure which poster you're on about, but mystified. Have I locked swords with them yet?

PS my problems are most definitely not with illegals, etc. It's accepted down here that cyclists are fair game. Buses, taxis, marked company vans. Complain all you want, but nothing changes.

========== Addition

I have to say, over all this COAST stuff and all that, sometimes I just directly adjust my speed.

Lots of narrow urban streets here (only enough road space for one car, once all the other cars are parked.). If I can't see properly past a few cars ahead, 20mph is the appropriate speed. No calculation needed to tell me that at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 01:30 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
nanki_poo wrote:
For all those words, you still have only two arguments:

a) it's not the driver's fault it's the governments. The government doesn't tell me not to run my unpleasant neighbour through with a garden fork, but I ain't going to do it. Anyone who needs to be told such things should not be in charge of either a garden fork or a motor vehicle!!!!



Last time I read my Bible.. it told me "Thou Shalt Not Kill" and this rule has been prominent in most civilised justice systems since Cain killed Abel. :roll:

(I am in the choir .. we sing in the Cathedral too! :wink: :lol: 8-) )


Quote:
b) get everyone that's not a car off the road because cars make it unsafe. Simple... instant, automatic one-three month ban for:

Parking on School zig-zags.



What if the car just conked out there. Has happened before now.

But yep .. those who do so deliberately .. the mumpties who say they want a cam outside the school too.... :roll:

Quote:
Exceeding urban speed limits by more than 30%



:yikes:

But then - what if the person is ferryng a sick relative or pal to hospital and conditions are fair and not one other person is around?


Lads and lasses here (and with other forces) might pull and escort. A cam would never use the same discretionary common sense though :wink:

We also have to keep any punishments in keeping with the crime committed and a ban for 39 mph in a 30 mph zone and no remedial training or advice is not helpful to any road safety policy.


Also - what if that road was 40 mph last week and is 30 mph this week? It does happen and familiar habit is a tricky thing to beat for some. :roll:

Quote:
Driving in compulsory cycle lanes



What if there are road works, series of pot holes in centre of road or an oncoming muppet straddles thw white by a margin - thus forcing the driver to move closer to the kerb or be hit head on?

These are instances where discretion is required. Also - some of the people carriers could be so wide that the nearside wheel could protrude over the solid white.

These are extreme cases - admittedly. But nonetheless mitigating circumstances which any civilised justice and policing system would have to take into account.

Quote:
Driving without DC&A


Still has to be proven beyond reasoned doubt and isnurance companies are full of 50/50 split liabiltity claims on various prangs.

Quote:
I think we'd see an improvement PDQ then. Especially if we lock their car up in the interim. Then a compulsory test to get back on the road.


The same should apply to cycling standards as well. I think the proposal to make all riders wear an idntifiable number on their clothiung would cut red light jumping and various dangersous practices. And yes - I want hiugh standard cycling proficiency offered to all who wish to commute or ride for fun regardless of age.

Quote:
As more children are killed while on foot than on cycles, should we also stop them from walking anywhere?


It's to do with volume. As the figures due out may indicate - we have more tragedies on bikes overall than previous. This does not reflect poor driving standards or cycling standards - but reflects the fact that with higher numbers on bikes - the more likely that some unlucky mishap can occur. It's how we seek to train, educate and police our roads which could reduce or even eradicate these problems.

Quote:
So, your child is definitely safe in your big car (which should make quick work of any child inconsiderate enough to walk/cycle when you f*ck up), but when the myocardial infarcation hits in his/her thirties that's tuff.


Like all these fads and fashions - someone comes along later to contradict. They are now saying that Yoga and Pilates are not that good for backs etc. :wink:

Personally I believe that kids should be allowed to be kids and simply pplay which can mean playing "catcch", "tag" "Hide and seek", "musical chairs" just as much as cycling and normal sport. :wink:

Quote:
And the old "well, if you had children..." doesn't work I'm afraid. If I had a child I may make a personal decision not to let them on main roads, but I would not be arguing we should discourage all kids so that I can carry on speeding around for some sort of (probably sexual) deep-seated gratification, I would be campaigning for safer roads and the measures I detail above.


My kids have been taught the Green Cross Code and I have been into schools in the past teaching all children how to use roads safely and confidently.

By the way - where is anyone on here arguing to caryy on "sppeding for some sexual gratification"? I think Mad Doc's brood and my own set of four prove we have very satisfactory marriages :lol: :lol:

Quote:
Remember, driving is a privelege, not a right.


Which most of us on here obtained by being focussed and committed enough to improve and continually evaluate and improve. :wink:

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Clunk!
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 01:54 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
nanki_poo wrote:
Ah! I just caught on in the re-reading of details that this is a northern forum.[.quote]

We are a much more laid back and sturdy breed up 'ere thee knows! :lol:

Quote:
You are right, the scenario is totally different. I know this, being one myself (though admittedly only as far 'North' as the midlands).

South of the border (Watford Gap) I was truly shocked. I never ever ever believed that a driver would ever actually aim at you. Until I moved to London.


I did work in the Met originally. My eldest brother is with them. :popcorn:

But I guess denser population leads to frazzled behaviour. :roll:

Quote:
I totally understand now. My brother is in the midlands, and drives all over the country. He just cannot understand London.


I never did manage to do so .. why I was glad to move up here

Quote:
Not sure which poster you're on about, but mystified. Have I locked swords with them yet?


Am sure it's very likely. :wink: I think he must have the most exercised fingers in the world from pumping the old keyboard :lol:


Quote:
PS my problems are most definitely not with illegals, etc. It's accepted down here that cyclists are fair game. Buses, taxis, marked company vans. Complain all you want, but nothing changes.



Hmmmm.. knock on effect from the militant bunch perhaps?

If people complain to us.. they think we ain't taking notice as we just thank them and do not contact again. Excuse is time and resources but that does not mean we are doing "nothing". We keep a discreet eye on the situation as reported and reel in and read riot acts as appropriate. Of course - we then get the "Have we nowt better to do" etc" :roll: :lol: 8-)


========== Addition

I have to say, over all this COAST stuff and all that, sometimes I just directly adjust my speed.

Lots of narrow urban streets here (only enough road space for one car, once all the other cars are parked.). If I can't see properly past a few cars ahead, 20mph is the appropriate speed. No calculation needed to tell me that at all.


Ahh... but even 20 mph can cause a problem. You look at reflections in wing mirrors, feet and footballs showing under the parked cars, drivers getting into cars. (They just set off without a look over the shoulder :yikes: and also the driver who has just pulled up. Someone in the car - not necessarily the driver may just open a door ... :roll:

So .. you watch and are feathering the brake as a constant on such roads. Incididentally - I'm at half that speed on such roads :wink:

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: In Gear
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 01:55 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 10:32
Posts: 29
I don't go much by the the bible, but even so, in my days as a christian it didn't have much about road traffic law.

The law says "thou shalt not kill" and so it also says ... the Highway Code.

The rest, as you say, is situation. The law allows for that, as you should, of all people, know. ;)

DC&A, I could convict in a second many things I see each day if the will was there amongst officers. As it happens, usually a £200 fine, slapped wrist and probably counselling to get over the harrowing experience of being in court.

However, a little depressing when the vehicle blocking the compulsory cycleway is actually a police car (not just anecdotal, actually with my own eyes on far too regular a basis)

I have an irritation with cyclists breaking laws. Red light jumpers are usually the ones who slow down at the other side of the junction, holding me up when I cross legally. But on this thread we're talking about causing a threat to life. Somehow I don't think . . .

However, cycling proficiency / top-ups, yes! Many new cyclists I know would use that!

Ah, heart attacks through lack of exercise are just a fad? Interesting, I wonder what the BMJ may have to say about that?

I hope the 'continually' is on a second-by-second basis... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Clunk!
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 02:03 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 10:32
Posts: 29
In Gear wrote:
Quote:
Not sure which poster you're on about, but mystified. Have I locked swords with them yet?


Am sure it's very likely. :wink: I think he must have the most exercised fingers in the world from pumping the old keyboard :lol:

Oh, someone I've had a problem with quite recently...? ;)
Quote:
If people complain to us.. they think we ain't taking notice as we just thank them and do not contact again. Excuse is time and resources but that does not mean we are doing "nothing". We keep a discreet eye on the situation as reported and reel in and read riot acts as appropriate. Of course - we then get the "Have we nowt better to do" etc" :roll: :lol: 8-)

I was referring more to reporting them to their bosses. The police are pretty powerless, it's their word my word, what can they do? no evidence. However, I do expect the police to at least uphold the laws themselves (in the scope of the Met police, I am talking about a minority here)
Quote:

Ahh... but even 20 mph can cause a problem. You look at reflections in wing mirrors, feet and footballs showing under the parked cars, drivers getting into cars. (They just set off without a look over the shoulder :yikes: and also the driver who has just pulled up. Someone in the car - not necessarily the driver may just open a door ... :roll:

So .. you watch and are feathering the brake as a constant on such roads. Incididentally - I'm at half that speed on such roads :wink:


Fair comment. Maybe I'll have a think on that, and reassess.

Advice always welcome. ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In Gear
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 02:20 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
nanki_poo wrote:
I don't go much by the the bible, but even so, in my days as a christian it didn't have much about road traffic law.

The law says "thou shalt not kill" and so it also says ... the Highway Code.

The rest, as you say, is situation. The law allows for that, as you should, of all people, know. ;)

DC&A, I could convict in a second many things I see each day if the will was there amongst officers. As it happens, usually a £200 fine, slapped wrist and probably counselling to get over the harrowing experience of being in court.


I think our paperwork is on trial most of the time :roll:

Also - lot of mags and judges will abide and toe the bench book guidelines - and I fear our learned friends are not so learned when it comes to interpreting common sense. :roll:




Quote:
However, a little depressing when the vehicle blocking the compulsory cycleway is actually a police car (not just anecdotal, actually with my own eyes on far too regular a basis)


Ooops! Have you not taken a photo? (They like photos ... :wink: ) And used the photographic evidence to complain? If chap was on a genuine shout - a one off - then fine.. we have to get hands on their collars!

If he's at Ye Olde Doughnutte Shoppe - then he's out of order and seriously - you should take a photo and first of all write a tactful letter pointing out that this is not a good example to oterh drivers on a road which is already throbbing with irate drivers and cyclists.

Quote:
I have an irritation with cyclists breaking laws. Red light jumpers are usually the ones who slow down at the other side of the junction, holding me up when I cross legally. But on this thread we're talking about causing a threat to life. Somehow I don't think . . .


Hmm - so not about losing momentum then :wink: given they slow down on the other side. :roll:

Quote:
However, cycling proficiency / top-ups, yes! Many new cyclists I know would use that!


Try contacting the CTC and the local council. We have two courses - one run by Darlington (part of Beacon plans) and another run by a CTC trained traner. I believe they can provide details and I also believe from a conversation with a CTC lady that London offers a number of such courses now. If you phone them - I am sure they will give details of the courses as set up in all London boroughs.


Quote:
Ah, heart attacks through lack of exercise are just a fad? Interesting, I wonder what the BMJ may have to say about that?


They said that Yoga and Pilates may not be as good for the old back as preached. But then I think it depends on the type of class you attend :wink:

Quote:
I hope the 'continually' is on a second-by-second basis... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


My wife orders me to go to sleep when she's driving as I "notice everything and give her a full evaluation afterwards." It's habit. :popcorn:
.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.892s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]