Live blog: Tour de France Stage 7 highlights and reaction, Adam Blythe of team Aqua Blue shares photo of his new Strada Due + more

This is an excellent proposal, long overdue. Extending it slightly - there is a problem with the whole consideration around the category of 'offenses against the person' (the legal category for crimes from assault through to murder, of one person inflicting physical harm on another), which should in theory be blind to the category of weapon used in any offense, but in practice the charges and punishment are lesser when the weapon is a motor vehicle. For example, all too often someone deliberately driving into someone else (through malice not through ineptitude) is treated as a driving offense rather than assault or similar.

@wtjs Try Surrey!

I refer the Honourable Squirrel to the discussion of August 31st in Another Place.

@Smoggysteve Based on the clip being old, having been reported on previously with no apparent new information making it worth re-reporting now, and the "reporters" knowing what the resulting online commentary would be... Could they be sued/tried for incitement to violence?

I don't use tubeless 🤷

Highway code rule 182 specifically says to look out for vehicles coming up from behind when turning left. The van also did not indicate. The arrow on the road doesn't remove those requirements from the van driver, just because he has to turn left doesn't mean it isn't a left turn. Also rule 170 says: Take extra care at junctions. You should watch out for cyclists etc. Still, I would have expected the van driver to completely ignore the rules of the road and held back until after the junction.

Was it that famous cricketer, Washington Irving, who wrote about those dystopian conflicts on the world pitch, or the spinner of tales Irving Washington?

I ought to point out that mdavidford was well aware when he wrote 'Orson Welles'- he was referring to the other topic: ttps://road.cc/offroad/feature/the-revolution-and-evolution-of-xc-how-cross-country-racing-has-changed-in-the-uk-and-beyond#comments

The cyclist was wrong to carry on thru with that turn, he asked for that

@mattw indeed. But ... ... "levelling the playing field" actions are themselves surprisingly difficult to target to the desired demographic - without everyone else piling in. The "mainstream" of people just trying to find the easier / cheaper way is large. And humans have some very particular senses of "fair". If some of the barriers to use of something are removed (eg. stigma) the choice landscape may change for everyone. At which point those who have more needs may get elbowed out of the queue again by the majority. Or the shared resource may just be overused. An example from NL are the rules around microcars (eg. Cantas) which can use cycle paths and are free from some other rules for motor vehicles. These are apparently being exploited by others for whom this provision was not intended (as a "free / more available parking" wheeze). Of course that might still be an improvement on the status quo of them driving motor vehicles! But a big increase in microcars would impact cyclists and indeed wheelchair users of the paths though. Hence my comment about cars: as soon as any reduction in motoring convenience is mooted we already see "selective concern" for those with visual impairments / disabilities... ("but what about taxis for the blind / but old people will be trapped in their homes...")