After an extended lay-off post-pandemic, the Adventure Travel Show is returning for its 25 edition on 11-12 January 2025 under iconic vaulted glass roof of the Business Design Centre in Islington, London. There will be more than 100 exhibitors and talks from a great line-up of explorers and adventurers who’ve returned from travels around the UK and across the globe by sail, foot, kayak, bus and of course, by bike.
A staple in the adventure travel calendar, the show has been brought back for this milestone edition, delivering a more immersive experience for attendees with two days of inspiration, expert talks, and an extensive showcase of the latest gear and travel destinations — whether you’re a cyclist, trekker, or motorbike adventurer.
The good news is that you can book early bird tickets for the two days now on the website, which costs £11 for each day. The even better news is that if you can use the code FREETIX, you can get attend both days for zero ticket costs. The code is valid for only the first 50 users, so chop chop, avail your free tickets here right now!
What to Expect
We are assuming if you’re here, you’d like to know what’s there for cyclists. Rest assured, this year’s show is set to be big on bikepacking, cycling tours, and adventure cycling gear. Exhibitors like Surly Bikes and Reilly Bikes will be in attendance, offering an impressive lineup of rugged, high-performance bikes built for long-distance adventure and off-road exploration. From Surly’s iconic range of steel-framed bikes designed for durability and comfort to Reilly’s custom carbon creations tailored for serious adventurers, there will be plenty for cycling aficionados to explore.
Additionally, brands like Monopati Hike N’ Bike from Greece and Bike Tours Portugal will bring a unique international flavor to the event. Monopati will be showcasing its bike-and-hike tours that combine cycling with hiking in the stunning Greek landscapes, while Bike Tours Portugal will offer expert insight into the country’s top cycling routes, from coastal paths to challenging mountain trails.
For those looking to take their cycling to the next level, there will be a range of cycling-related talks and workshops covering everything from training for multi-day tours to essential bikepacking gear. With bikepacking continuing to grow in popularity, the show is the perfect place to get inspired for your next cycling adventure.
Expert Speakers and Adventure Talks
The 2025 Adventure Travel Show also offers a chance to hear from some seriously inspiring people who’ve taken on epic journeys and are ready to share their stories.
Among the highlights is Carlton Reid, Forbes’ transport correspondent, former editor of BikeBiz and author of Roads Were Not Built for Cars. Reid will be discussing his recent off-road, round-Britain ride, where he explored the hidden gems of the UK’s lesser-known bike routes and tackled some of the most challenging off-road terrains.
Felicity Cloake, travel and food journalist for The Guardian, will be sharing her experiences from her food-focused cycling ride across the USA. She’s cycled coast to coast, exploring the country one bite at a time — meeting local chefs, trying regional dishes, and discovering how food and cycling can make the perfect travel combo. If you’re into food, cycling, or both (duh!), Felicity’s talk will definitely inspire your next bike-and-food adventure.
Kate Rawles, an adventure cyclist and author of Carbon Cycle, will also be at the show to share stories from her eco-friendly bike journeys and chat about how cycling can both challenge and inspire us to think more sustainably.
Meanwhile, Rebecca Lowe, author of Slow Road to Tehran, will be talking about her solo ride from London to Iran. If you’re thinking about doing a long-distance solo ride (or just love hearing about bold, life-changing trips), Rebecca’s talk will be packed with insights.
Then there’s Sahir Permall, who did an Adventure Queens-funded ride from Scotland to Turkey, will also be talking about the ups and downs of solo travel, the importance of community, and what it’s like to take on a big adventure as a woman of colour.
And last but definitely not least, Duncan Covey will join the show live (Wi-Fi willing!) from his round-the-world cycling trip. Duncan’s journey is still going strong, so he’ll be sharing live updates, talking about the challenges he’s faced, and what it’s really like to be on the road for months (or years) at a time.
Tickets and Information
The 2025 Adventure Travel Show is just around the corner, and tickets are now available! While there are already early-bird discounts for those who book in advance, with our exclusive offer, you can get 2 free tickets using the code FREETIX — two free tickets per use!
The discount codes will be capped at a maximum of 50 pairs to keep things fair on a first come, first serve basis. So, if you want to snag your free tickets, don’t wait too long — click this link to book yours now.
The show runs from 11-12 January 2025 at the Business Design Centre in Islington, London. For full details on the event, exhibitors, and the full speaker lineup, head over to the official Adventure Travel Show website. And remember—FREETIX for your free pair of tickets, while they last!
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
71 thoughts on “Standard slams “homicidal cyclists charging at pedestrians”… with image showing motorist about to hit cyclists on bike lane; Evenepoel says his shoulder is “pretty much destroyed”; Brutalist ‘brifters’ blasted by baffled bicyclists + more on the live blog”
ah the “comment / opinion”
ah the “comment / opinion” piece. Even more devoid of fact or balance than the usual MSM nonsense. Who knew the Standard was still a thing? (guess that’s the real point of the article though aint it)
Sod this I’m off out for a ride
It won’t be a thing much
It won’t be a thing much longer. Discarded Standards used to be everywhere on the rail network around London (and that was in the paid days). I can’t remember the last time I saw one. Is it online only now?
Surreyrider wrote:
It’s once a week now – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evening_Standard#2024:_from_daily_to_weekly,_with_redundancies
What a weird article in the
What a weird article in the Standard. Almost everything said in there about cyclists holds true for motorists (more so, since whatever she thinks, a car is way more likely to make you into a KSI statistic) and yet she’s clearly not paralysed with fear by passing cars.
Shock of the old (but new
Shock of the old (but new again), innit?
TBF there are probably a bunch of psychological / cultural things going on (around how we view motorists / roads vs. how we view cyclists). Plus cars make noise…
chrisonabike wrote:
Not electric cars travelling at less than 20mph.
bobbinogs wrote:
Not electric cars travelling at less than 20mph.— chrisonabike
Are you telling me that’s an actual UFO that lands regularly outside our neighbour’s house?
We often joke about the
We often joke about the ‘homicidal pedestrian’ but i really do think awareness of how dangerous stepping into a cycle lane without looking can be needs to be raised.
Often after a near miss I’ll see looks on their faces that suggest they think I’m at fault for being in the narrow strip of gutter assigned to me when they suddenly decided to cross the road without looking.
Its motornormativity at play
Its motornormativity at play as usual. People look out for cars or more often, listen for cars so they are not expecting bikes. If cycling was far more prevalent people would think about it more. People also don’t like to admit they are wrong about anything so they go on the offensive regardless of whose fault it was.
You should try cycling down
You should try cycling down Lombard Street at 8.45am or 5-6pm sometime.
Practically half the pedestrians are wandering along are drifting aimlessly across the road without a scrap of attention to anything.
And indeed, any kind of effort to draw their attention to the fact that traffic might be coming along the road is generally met with a vexed scowl as if you are blameworthy for wanting to use the road! ??
The guy in the pink hoodie in
The guy in the pink hoodie in the photo: given the angle of his bike, I wonder whether he swerved in alarm as that car was driven out into the cycle lane?
I have to plead guilty to
I have to plead guilty to part of these alleged cycling vices. I do pedal furiously on a regular basis.
Me too, but it never seems to
Me too, but it never seems to result in as much velocity as I hoped!
Mr Blackbird wrote:
Is that the form your aversive action takes?
And finally: given the
And finally: given the editing, I would LOVE to know what the actual questions posed to those people in the video were, and to what degree they were egged on by the interviewer.
I would LOVE to know what the
I would LOVE to know what the actual questions posed to those people in the video were
I can guess at the first one, after they have assessed the potential mark for undesirable characteristics (lycra-clad, TdF wannabee, not obese enough etc.): do you read the hyper-junk press? An unashamed affirmative should get them the answers they want.
Something along these lines I
Something along these lines I expect !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahgjEjJkZks
Also refering to the phone
Also refering to the phone theft fear :
I bought a new mobile phone in October. If only it occured to me at the time, being a cyclist, I could have stolen one from a terrified pedestrian.
Don’t say that! You’ll give
Don’t say that! You’ll give us all a bad name!
If you do have your phone
If you do have your phone stolen, don’t wait 2 days to contact the bank like this bloke !
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy8y70pvz92o
Hirsute wrote:
And if you do discover that your phone wasn’t stolen after all, don’t go and turn it on without telling the police/employer that you were wrong about it being stolen.
Similar issue with e-bikes:
Similar issue with e-bikes: Judging by the machines I see on the road it would appear to be easier to buy an illegal electric motorbike or e-scooter than an EAPC.
The growth of opportunities for people do illegal stuff has outpaced the Police’s ability to enforce it to the point that the police don’t bother with any enforcement at all.
“A useful mode of transport
“A useful mode of transport has been hijacked by lunatics”
Pure, unadulterated clickbait.
eburtthebike wrote:
I’d go one step further and class it ragebait.
It just bleeds into the idea
It just bleeds into the idea that cyclists are fundamentally bad.
“I’m scared of cyclists because of phone theft”. No, you’re scared of people stealing your phone, not cyclists.
I swear that any time anyone on two wheels does anything wrong its reflected on cyclists and yet stick another 2 wheels onto that and magically its the distinct person behind the wheel to blame rather than the collective group. Well, until they hurt someone and then its the car that did the hurting.
Not scared of the real threat
Not scared of the real threat though (cows).
Clem Fandango wrote:
https://road.cc/content/forum/police-issue-cow-warning-after-man-seriously-injured-308531
mctrials23 wrote:
I’m scared by drivers coming up behind me because I’ve beem close passed so many times I think it’s going to happen again. Am I wrong to be afraid? I find it difficult to distinguish the good drivers from the bad so I prefer to assume they are bad until they’ve proved otherwise.
Do I write articles condemning all drivers. No I just report the bad ones and hope the police will take action against those that need it. I am often diappointed.
If only the police could be
If only the police could be bothered. Someone in my neighbourhood watch police meeting asked the officers if they could do bike patrols. There are four officers and one bike, and they would all need to undergo two training courses before they are allowed to ride the ward bicycle, so the answer was basically no.
I just hope they have enough truncheons, boots, helmets etc in the police station, and that they’re all trained on how to use them.
Well Gloucestershire are
Well Gloucestershire are getting better. I’m being told whether or not action is to be taken, but not what action, within a few days of each report and I’ve just heard that an advisory letter is going out for a close pass when in the past it would nave been NFA. Not ideal I know but small steps in the right direction are always encouraging.
So cyclists weren’t involved
So cyclists weren’t involved in 93% of serious injuries to pedestrians in London then?
Presumably that means 93% of injuries involved drivers of motor vehicles, to which you could add the riders of illegal motorised cycles involved in the other 7%.
I’d be happy to see some motor vehicles stopped for running red lights or failing to give way at a zebra crossing. I’d wager the Met have stopped far more cyclists than drivers for running reds
It was other pedestrians and
It was other pedestrians and sacks of potatoes falling from the sky.
In addition, the 7% figure is
In addition, the 7% figure is entirely meaningless unless it is complemented by information regarding who was at fault in these collisions. RLJ cyclists in London infuriate me and I have to admit it’s getting worse with significant numbers of people now not just jumping reds when it’s clear but slaloming through busy pelican crossings when people are using them (though I must add as a corollary to that in 50 km of cycling in London most days I haven’t seen a cyclist hit a pedestrian since 2018). However, almost every time I ride there are multiple instances where I have to swerve, brake or otherwise take evasive action due to pedestrians stepping out into the road or onto cycleways without looking, almost always with their heads buried in their mobile devices. I would be most interested to see the figures with illegal electric motorcycles and pedestrian-at-fault injuries removed; from my empirical observations from many thousands of kilometres of cycling in and around central London each year I would be really surprised if the percentage of (legal) cyclist-at-fault pedestrian injuries was anything like cycling’s modal share in the city.
Press charges – is Ludgate
Press charges – is Ludgate Hill in the USA then ?
RE: what about this “hideous”
RE: what about this “hideous” pothole?
Come on, that’s just fishing for everyone’s “that’s not a pothole! This is a pothole” – admit it!
(No subject)
Does this count ?
Does this count ?
That’s two helpful self
That’s two helpful self-filling examples already!
Definitely more bang for your buck-off than the Trafford example.
The predictable slew of anti
The predictable slew of anti-cyclist articles is depressing, with the equally predictable total absence of any recognition that (a) cyclist / pedestrian collisions very rarely result in more than bruises at worst, and are completely different category of risk to driver/pedestrian collisions, and (b) police in London regularly raid red light jumping hotspots and fine cyclists – Ive seen far more cyclists stopped for this than motorists.
AND YET ….. And yet …
She is right about a lot of things. I absolutely do see vastly more cyclists jumping red lights and zebra crossings than when I began commuting through London 20 years ago.
It IS primarily men who I see doing this.
There IS a rational basis that people fear phone snatching by two-wheelers, because that is defintiely now the preferred modus operandi of phone thieves – with e-bikes being quieter, more versatile and less traceable than scooters or motorbikes.
You don’t need to ask a loaded question to get those responses, because for most non-cyclists, they don’t register the well behaved ones as there’s no need to – and there is plentiful opportunity to see and experience the badly behaved ones in London, quite apart from the constant stream of media rage-bait.
Small but very relevant example: when I started commuting in London, pedestrians would in general start crossing zebra crossings if I or other cyclists were approaching and cross in reasonable confidence that we would stop and wait for them.
Now almost no pedestrian will step onto a zebra crossing when I am approaching on a bike, and indeed some will not even do so if I slow or stop – and hesitant if I wave them across. Because, with very reasonable grounds, they believe it is highly likely that approaching cyclists will not stop for them to cross and they may be at risk if they do. I find this very sad, to be honest
It seems to be becoming a
It seems to be becoming a growing concern – with the risk exaggerated and disproportionate ire and certainly fanned by media and general discourse – but based in reality.
I don’t live near or visit London (except in transit) but perhaps this is an effect of “transition”? So in the space between “only the fit and the brave” and “mass cycling” maybe you get “the fit, the brave, those who DGAF and the frankly criminal”?
It may be worth noting that when NL really started turning their ship around 50 years ago (from the same kind of “knock down the buildings to let more motor vehicles in) … they still had “mass cycling” – indeed far more cycling than the UK does today. And in fact had more widespread “cycle infra” in the form of the cycle paths – which predate but may have been sustained and expanded in part by an earlier effort to protect motor scooter riders from other motor traffic.
I think there is something
I think there is something about the type of bike, and about the “transition”.
The vast majority of Dutch cyclists ride what you might call utility bicycles – i.e. not racing bike/road bike, or mountain bike. But wide handle bar & basket, or cargobike, or such.
They aren’t designed for speed or squeezing through traffic, because there’s no need for it. And the volume of people cycling at normal pace more or less imposes that pace on everyone else, especially in the town/city centres.
The “transition” in UK has been so slow and disjointed that those who do take the plunge to cycling through London e.g. still have to be pretty dauntless to not be put off by the aggressive drivers, lethal HGVs and buses, chaotic junctions, cycle infrastructure that gives you 200m of protection and then throws you abruptly into a maelstrom …. and a relentless barrage of bile churned at you from the media, and parroted back to you at work, at your sports club, at the pub, at the school gate etc etc.
So it’s perhaps not surprising that those who stick at it have a disproportionate share of devil-may-cares among them
Partly – would it be also
Partly – would it be also that the cycles chosen (and that dealers put out there) are a reflection of the conditions and the people cycling. Like in the UK most people – even those “into cars” – don’t buy an open-topped race car which doesn’t actually have luggage space (or a built in lock) as their primary vehicle. And the market is full of practical general purpose vehicles *
The conditions and the infra in NL allow most people to cycle short distances practically – that’s what explains cheap, not fussy or “speedy” but very durable and practical bikes (which like UK cars often live outdoors) **. The infra itself although not specifically designed for high speed is hardly ever going to slow you down. (in fact they understand the importance of maintaining cyclist momentum eg. avoiding complete stops). And the Dutch race and have velomobiles… but like most people in the UK most people in NL aren’t racers.
I’d question whether the UK in general or even most of London is at the start of a transition. And London is a bit of an outlier in the UK.
* the analogy doesn’t go so far, because the market is sometimes trying to upsell stuff which in fact people don’t need, and for cars there is a strong “displaying social position” element.
** Also history and culture feed in – the traditional “Dutch bike” is just their version of bikes that were common in the early days of the 20th century “bike boom”. Some have suggested that a culture of not being “flashy” has kept it relatively unchanged. There’s also that for normal use most of the key features were hit upon early – after that “marginal gains”.
I don’t think it is
I don’t think it is peculiarly Dutch even. I’ve travelled all over Europe for work, and I’d say that the popularity of this style of bike is much higher all across Europe – including in Switzerland, which distinctly does not have a culture of “not being flashy” …
I didn’t really know why in UK we’ve gravitated away from them. It’s hard to distinguish cause from effect. Is this type of bike less popular because only the hard core cycle in UK, or do only the hardcore cycle because of you walk into a bike shop this is pretty much they only types of bike you see?
Velo-drone wrote:
(A long ramble …) In a word: cars.
In several words: it’s the lack of appropriate infra that motor vehicles haven’t taken over.
The most common types of bike depend largely on who is riding, how they are riding and for what purposes. I’ll come back to that (type of bike/rider/purpose) at the end.
History: when people could get cheap personal transport that was much more effective than walking and cheaper / less maintenance than a horse, they got it. That was initially cycles of varied kinds. After infra had improved (partly because bikes, and then more because early motor vehicles / cheaper tarmac) and the price of motor vehicles came down (AND they were pushed hard by governments), people bought cars. Once sufficient numbers had done so the roads started becoming less safe and pleasant for cycling and they also started being further adapted for the benefit of driving on at the expense of cycling.
Again, I suspect the primary cause (for whether people cycle and who) is how convenient / pleasant / safe / culturally accepted cycling is. Both absolutely but – probably more important – relative to other modes. And in most places the “default” mode is driving.
Cycling is often not pleasant or safe * because motor vehicles exist and our public spaces have largely been adapted for them to progress at high speed and in numbers.
Cycling is less convenient than driving because the greater reach of cars means we’re expected to get places quicker and our amenities are now further apart. There are now traffic lights which delay cyclists (it’s harder to start from standstill with a bike than a car!) and we often don’t have secure cycle parking.
Cycling is not culturally accepted because this has been the case for generations, because (uniquely) we now expect cycling to be done in a less social manner than other transport. Plus motor vehicles now bound up with all kinds of social status and role-marking factors.
I think the former is a fair summary. What’s available guides buyers’ choices BUT the common choices are reflected by the market here **.
Finally (!) who cycles? Per previous ramble in the UK we have more of the “enthusiasts”, the fit and the brave cycling. (And the poor and desperate). What do they cycle for? We have less “transport” cycling and more “recreation / fitness / sport” cycling. Our transport cycling is in large part commuting – tends to be men who are doing this for fitness purposes. How do they cycle? If people are cycling for fitness obviously they’ll go faster, but when cycling with fast traffic it generally feels “safer” to try to keep up.
All of that tends to favour use of cycles which are designed either explicitly for sports / cycle touring or generally prioritise lighter weight / faster speed. Because of parking issues we tend to store bikes inside, so more delicate components are OK, and because of enthusiasts bikes that allow more customisation and may require more maintenance make sense.
In e.g. NL there is far less “need for speed” (running with the cars). On the other hand “low maintenance” is extremely important. (Most people want bikes that “just work” every day and don’t want to spend evenings / weekends doing maintenance.). Being durable enough to be parked outside is important. Being able to carry things is important (more people doing the shopping / taking kids or even other adults around).
Altogether a low-maintenance but very reliable cycle which just does everything you need once you’ve bought it will be what sells most there (just like most cars!). So mudguards, carriers, built in lighting and lock, simple controls.
* “Safe” is an interesting one and for humans generally doesn’t mean just some meansure of “actual risk”.
** There is some “fashion” – lots of the “bike-shaped objects” in the UK are in the “mountain bike” style. I’m not quite sure how that came to be but I do note that people have the same tendency for cars e.g. buying “off-road” style vehicles (or 4-wheel drive”) which will clearly never go near any mud!
I work in the city of London
I work in the city of London 3 days a week near to St Pauls.
Each time I walk from City Thameslink to my place of work and cyclist going through red lights and crossings are part of the expectation. I deal with it by anticipating (and tutting loudly when appropriate). That said, I also do walk across roads when the man is red, but I do it in a careful and considered manner, always checking for vehicles turning.
Most cyclists running the reds are also doing so in a careful and considered manner, even if I do not do it myself when out on a bike, they are not really harming anyone (well mostly). The delivery riders on there modified “e-bikes” are the worst to watch out for though when crossing at a green man, they are the most unpredictable and thier speed is often hard to guage.
Apart from that the worst of the worst I have seen/been affected by was a yoof wheeling down the far side of a bus which was stopped at the crossing lights (i had the green man). The yoof bolted through the crossing while we were still on it and narrowly missed me and I had little time to react as I could not see round the bus as I neared the pavement.
Am I now terrified to be on the pavement/cross the road, no because I am aware of my suroundings and do not just walk around with my head in the clouds.
I can’t work up much sympathy
I can’t work up much sympathy for the people complaining that pedestrian-cyclist collisions are under-reported when they don’t bother reporting one themselves. It’s also notable that the cyclist also hit the ground (skin in the game) and was chastised by other cyclists, so probably a learning opportunity for them (assuming that the collision was avoidable).
Went to fit some easy fit
Went to fit some easy fit mudguards earlier to find that the existing set are not easy remove. It’s a 2mm or 2.5mm bolt which does not look like shifting in a month of Sundays. I think I going to have to drill them out – ouch !
That’s not a pothole. This is
That’s not a pothole. This is a pothole…
The road to our hamlet was dry 18 months ago – still awaiting repairs
The water is only a few cm deep except where the cyclist moves over to avoid on-coming traffic and finds this hidden hole.
I’d be interested in what
I’d be interested in what anyone who cycles in south Trafford thinks about the ‘best in Manchester’ claim.
I see very little evidence of cycling infrastructure between Stretford and Altrincham, unless the towpath of the Bridgewater canal counts.
People need to realise that
People need to realise that there is nothing special about cyclists, they are a full mix and cross-section of the population. A cyclist is just an English person sitting on a bicycle. If they do not respect the law, are rude and inconsiderate, it is because the English do not respect the law, are rude and inconsiderate. If you go to countries where pedestrians respect the red man light, you will find these same people respect the red traffic light when they are sitting on a bicycle. Why do you expect the English to change their behaviour and become angels just because they sit on a bicycle?
neilmck wrote:
I may be wrong, but I think there’s some non-English cyclists too
Yes, that’s the logic in the
Yes, that’s the logic in the ideal case and a reasonable counter to that expectation … but … cyclists are an out-group in the UK like most places, so different expectations will be applied.
Plus of course because of the conditions cyclists in UK aren’t equal to the “full cross-section of the population” in terms of proportions of specific groups. (As opposed to eg. NL where the demographics of those “cycling” are much closer to the population in general eg. young, old, men, women, rich, poor, those with disabilities etc.)
There are also probably slight differences in behaviour of those doing the activity (simple example is that while pedestrians, drivers and cyclists don’t always obey traffic signals the groups tend to break the rules in different ways).
I live in Paris and cyclists
I live in Paris and cyclists are not an out-group here. They are really an equal mix of the French. Both sexes, roughly equally and all ages and fitness range (especially now with electric bicycles)
Sounds great!
Sounds great!
Kids – “safe independent mobility for children” should be the slogan for change. I think much else flows from it!
Christ, I didn’t realise I
Christ, I didn’t realise I had to be English to cycle.
As I’m not, I’d better stop cycling immediately.
dubwise wrote:
I didn’t realise that the English weren’t permitted to respect the law. As I am, I’d better stop doing so immediately.
Some English people have
Some English people have become angels while sitting on bicycles – ie the ones who have been killed after being hit by cars etc.
I’m not racist but …
I’m not racist but …
We remember Agincourt.
Puppet in a String.
Singletrack had these piston
Singletrack had these piston spreaders on their fresh goods Friday.
https://sumartuk.sumupstore.com/product/ubb-20-universal-bleed-block
Oooh nice. One inbound.
Oooh nice. One inbound.
It looked a lot nicer than
It looked a lot nicer than the one reviewed on here.
I, of course, am waiting for as nice looking, hopefully easy to use four piston version.
Cyclists wear crash helmets
Cyclists wear crash helmets for safety reasons and then ride through red lights – a cyclist was killed in Clapham Junction by a cyclist going through a red light.
YOU DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE, A RED LIGHT MEANS STOP.
kingleo wrote:
Citation please? Not heard of this despite being only a few miles away from me and Google appears to have no knowledge of it.
I wear a cycling helmet for
I wear a cycling helmet for safety reasons, but don’t ride through red lights ( It would be dangerous you see. I could cause an accident or get hit by a car/ juggernaut). Does that in any way reduce the thrust of your statement?
Tell the motorists.
Tell the motorists.
There are far more safety requirements for cars, far more stringent regulations, and yet drivers push the rules to the limit constantly, as much as they think they’ll get away with. The only rule on the road for very many drivers is that if you can get away with it, then you should do it.
If you look properly you will see drivers jumping red lights at almost every junction. If you don’t see it, then that’s because it’s so normal you don’t notice it anymore.
YOU DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE, A
YOU DO NOT HAVE A CHOICE, A RED LIGHT MEANS STOP
Neither of these statements is true for drivers in Lancashire
https://upride.cc/incident/a15tjv_bmwm4_redlightpass/
I have loads of these, reported but ignored by the police
kingleo wrote:
How about if I go through a red light in a specific and limited way?
hawkinspeter wrote:
If you’re travelling fast enough then the red light could appear green due to the doppler shift!
Does driving into someone
Does driving into someone also mean ‘stop, you have no choice’? “Recorded hit-and-run incidents increased from 19,239 in 2013 to 28,010 in 2017, according to Freedom of Information responses from 27 of the 44 police forces in England and Wales.”
kingleo wrote:
No, they wear them because of forty years of misinformation and propaganda.
Brown trouser moment for this
Brown trouser moment for this cyclist
What is it about blind bends that drivers don’t understand?
https://youtu.be/4Z4EpR7mheU?t=185
mgif a couple of incidents later
https://youtu.be/4Z4EpR7mheU?t=223