As I was pedalling through a notorious black spot for road accidents, Elephant and Castle roundabout, I noticed the bill board advertising a new drama on ITV called ‘Collision’. Bearing in mind that a cyclist was killed practically beneath the sign earlier this year makes it rather insensitive don’t you think? Apparently they are advertising another new mini drama outside the Royal Infirmary called ‘Cot death’. Sicko’s.
- Opinion
Bad taste
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £2.49. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
No Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
More Opinion
Latest Comments
They need to change their insurance then.
Driver had to urgently deliver a consignment of ferrets to protect their welfare.
Driver was committed to the overtake.
Under the law of it's their land and they can do what they like.
"The Square Mile of the City of London has applied its 20mph speed limit to bicycles as well as vehicles." Bicycles are vehicles.
Under what law?
@ROOTminus1 I can see the valid argument for not requiring beacons (horrifically expensive because they require power). The solution is do what lots of other countries in Europe do. Retroreflective warning signs. If Austrian drivers can reliably give way at a zebra crossing under a couple of inches of snow (seriously, I was wondering why drivers were so nice about letting me cross to my hotel when skiing, until day 5 when the snow melted enough to see the road markings!) then british drivers and cyclists should comfortably cope without needing lit signage and instead just have reflectors.
There is a slight question as to whether some people with eg sight impairments have simply been overlooked in NL, just like they normal are here. That's because attitudes to cycling are somewhat like people drive here eg. it's just accepted that cycle paths are *for cycling*. Still much better than cars though I'd suggest. Ultimately in a car you're invulnerable and can barely hear the cries of horror and disapproval. Plus the world is still telling you you're more important than anyone without a car...
Indeed - and there will be "fighting over scraps" (largely dominated by pedestrian complaints because it's still a very popular mode) and it will be *impossible* to move forward (literally) because for "safety" cyclists will need to slow or indeed stop because we *have* to have formal crossings of a barely 1.5m cycle path... ... until some day the infra has been improved, and cyclists are a common sight, and many people do cycle sometimes. At which point most people will decide that *obviously* the cycle path is for cycling and it's antisocial to slow cyclists eg. by waiting for buses in the cycle path. And anyway there's no need to because cyclists aren't a "threat" and thus formal crossings aren't needed. Just wait a couple of seconds and they're past and you can cross the path in a couple of seconds yourself. The only reason I know that is because it happens thousands of times per day, a little over 100 miles away from the UK (and people in NL are hardly less argumentative than over here)...
(Immigrants, Labour, cyclists) They must love Deliveroo... turquoise kryptonite.
