Cyclist despairs as Amazon van driver takes cycle lane shortcut before parking on pavement; “Felt like a monkey humping a cricket ball”: Richie Porte tries swimming; A magical road for your cycling bucket list; Fake website warning + more on the live blog

77 thoughts on “Cyclist despairs as Amazon van driver takes cycle lane shortcut before parking on pavement; “Felt like a monkey humping a cricket ball”: Richie Porte tries swimming; A magical road for your cycling bucket list; Fake website warning + more on the live blog”

1. https://www.theguardian.com
   https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2022/nov/24/ignore-false-claims-and-bad-journalism-most-ltns-do-reduce-traffic

   Grauniad debunking anti-LTN stats opinion piece.

   While we are on TLAs, here’s a preemptive one for our tedious troll: FON

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Joke piece in comedy
     Joke piece in comedy newspaper. The article starts by saying

     “I’m starting to wonder if anyone is ever going to make an honest argument against cycling and walking infrastructure again. They do exist. People used to say things like “I want to drive and park wherever I like”, or “why should cyclists and pedestrians inconvenience my much more important car journey?”.”

     From the opposing view you could say:

     “I’m starting to wonder if anyone is ever going to make an honest argument against motorists again. They do exist. People used to say things like “I don’t want working class people driving and parking in my middle class neighbourhood”, or “why should motorists get to work faster than me walking?”

     The article then goes on to state that cycling activists who data mine LTN statistics to support his argument produce “good data”, and those rational actors producing data which shows the opposite produce “bad data”.

     Tiny minds might be fooled by this propaganda, but intelligent people can see the article for what it is.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Rakia wrote:

       From the opposing view you could say…

       — Rakia

       Once again you’re missing the point (perhaps deliberately). The article goes on to say that the viewpoint is politically incorrect. Yours is too. That’s the point that the article is making.

       You’re equating one person’s right to get to work within X minutes with someone else’s right to not get cancer from vehicle emissions and their safety to cross the road. By your measure, you’re being fair. It’s a good thing that the local authorities introducing LTNs, and the democratically elected councillors, disagree. And I will continue to vote for councillors who take action.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • It’s time to stop feeding
         It’s time to stop feeding this troll

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • lesterama wrote:

           It’s time to stop feeding this troll

           — lesterama

           I wish people would stop telling me what to do. If there were a button for reporting misinformation, I would use it, but as it stands, there isn’t.
           I don’t like misinformation being left unchallenged.

         • That must be a fulltime job

           That must be a fulltime job then.

           You are just feeding them in a constant loop.

         • I absolutely agree with your

           I absolutely agree with your principles. On the other hand, Rakia has shown time and again that they are out to troll and that they get psychological gain from their baiting. I was speaking semi-rhetorically, but also hoping we can find a way to get them off this site until the next incarnation.

         • This one from yesterday is

           This one from yesterday is the best reply I have seen

           Hi Rakia, rather than trying to get attention on cycling forums, you may find some of the following groups helpful:

           https://mensgroup.com/community

           http://menupnorth.co.uk/

           https://www.directionsformen.org.uk/

            

           There are often more local groups too.  I’m sure you would be able to find a sympathetic person to sit down with and talk to for a while; developing genuine personal relationships will be much better in the long term for your mental health, rather than trolling on the internet for the short term feeling that someone, anyone has at least acknowledged your existence.

           I appreciate that reaching out like this will feel like a big challenge but I am sure it will be worth your while.

           Best wishes

           — stomec

            

       • I’m not missing the point.
         I’m not missing the point. The article is alleging that people are repackaging old, politically incorrect, opinions and reframing them in more palatable ways.

         I’m saying the same is true of LTN advocates. They are motivated by gentrification: a hatred of working class people who simply want to get about their business in an efficient manner. Instead of admitting it, they dress their arguments up in terms of “liveable cities”, “social justice” and “equality”, despite the fact that LTNs produce more unequal outcomes.

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • You missed the oint of my TLA
           You missed the point of my TLA – fuck off Nigel.

         • Today, I learned, from a self
           Today, I learned, from a self-elected representative of the working class, that making streets safer and improving air quality is “gentrification”. That must be the Oxford English Dictionary (Rakia Edition) again eh.

         • More and more I’m thinking

           More and more I’m thinking some of these accounts are attempting some subtle satire / parody.  Although that might be by accident.

           Who knows any more – post-Putin’s disinformation strategy, post-Trump (maybe…), post-Johnson – so much disdain for the idea of “truth” that possibly satire and parody have themselves become meaningless.

         • Rakia wrote:

            They are motivated by gentrification: a hatred of working class people who simply want to get about their business in an efficient manner. Instead of admitting it, they dress their arguments up in terms of “liveable cities”, “social justice” and “equality”, despite the fact that LTNs produce more unequal outcomes.

           — Rakia

           Which is why in London you are 2.7 times more likely to live in an LTN if you are in the poorest 25% of the population than if you are in the 25% richest. I suppose you could call that an unequal outcome…

         • I find it sad that you are
           I find it sad that you are trying to make capital out of this false trope that LTNs help poorer people.

           Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah knows the cynical truth about LTNs and their designs to push traffic to poorer areas on main roads. They contributed to the death of her daughter. I suggest you spend a few minutes listening to her speaking to the popular and astute radio presenter Nick Ferrari on LBC last week: https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/nick-ferrari/appalling-councils-fining-londoners-driving-through-ltn-kissi-debrah/

           She is writing to the ever-useless mayor of London Sadiq Khan for an explanation on the rollout of his latest ulez money-making scheme… I won’t hold my breath waiting for a response

         • Nigel wrote:

           Rosamund Adoo-Kissi-Debrah knows the cynical truth about LTNs and their designs to push traffic to poorer areas on main roads.

           — Nigel

           I’m pretty sure the point was that they lived next to a main road: the South Circular – one of the ones actually designed to be a major traffic route, which is going to be busy regardless of any LTN or other form of modal filter which is practically designed to be hostile to anyone not in a car, 

           (Aside from that, her daughter died in 2013.  When were all these LTNs set up, again?)

     • Rakia wrote:

       People used to say things like “I don’t want working class people driving and parking in my middle class neighbourhood”, or “why should motorists get to work faster than me walking?”

       — Rakia

       *citation needed

       Log In or Register to post comments

     • Rakia wrote:

       Joke piece in comedy newspaper.

       — Rakia

       Second most trusted newspaper in the UK: https://pressgazette.co.uk/news/times-telegraph-trust/

       But then again, don’t let facts get in the way eh. 

        

       Log In or Register to post comments

     • Speaking of Tiny minds and

       Speaking of Tiny minds and intelligent people? The sheer irony coming from you!

       I’ll be up in London  next week having cancelled my trip to Paris and am looking forward to having a cycle around some LTN’s, you should do the same. Maybe C U Next Tuesday?! 
        

       Log In or Register to post comments

   • Sounds like you also need a

     Sounds like you also need a link to another Guardian article already:

     https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2022/mar/03/anti-cycling-trolls-andrew-tierney-online-abuse

     Although this bit doesn’t fit:

     He was shocked to discover that many of those making hateful comments use their real names. “You click on their profile picture, and it’s their normal account; there’s no hiding involved,” he says.

     — Grauniad

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Yep, anyone threatening
       Yep, anyone threatening or encouraging violence should be taken to task.

       Of course, there are two sides to that one-sided comedy story aren’t there? Militant cyclists as well as motorists threaten people with opposing viewpoints with violence.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • Rakia wrote:

         Yep, anyone threatening or encouraging violence should be taken to task.

         — Rakia

         Do you mean like somebody saying that a teenage female climate activist should be beaten on the bottom? Or perhaps somebody saying that they hoped a professional boxer who was filmed breaking the law would punch the person filming them? Or maybe somebody who, seeing a man go off on a psychopathic rant with physical threats against a couple, remarks, “LOL that was entertaining!” Just a few examples of what you’ve said in the past.

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • Nope, I don’t mean
           Nope, I don’t mean encouraging children to learn discipline, or empowering black sports people to take a stand against racism, or making a tongue in cheek comment about a “handbags at dawn” confrontation.

           I mean people who actively encourage violence against others, whether that is motorists posting that they hope cyclists get run over on Twitter, or cyclists inviting others to shoot journalists with an opposing viewpoint.

         • Rakia wrote:

           Nope, I don’t mean encouraging children to learn discipline, or empowering black sports people to take a stand against racism, or making a tongue in cheek comment about a “handbags at dawn” confrontation.

           — Nigel Garrage

           Leaving aside the rank hypocrisy and disingenuous nature of your comments (filming Chris Eubank breaking the law is not actually racism and if it had been a different black person, e.g. Diane Abbott, and somebody had claimed it was racism you would be the first to ridicule that claim), I notice you do not deny that you made those comments, comments that were made under usernames of people that were banned from this site for, amongst other things, racism. 

         • Isn’t it finally time to

           Isn’t it finally time to leave Nigel ‘Blackface’ Garage alone and let him wind himself out into a void of silence and indifference?

2. Right then, stats geek here.

   Right then, stats geek here.

    

   What we need to do is apply a counterfactual for LTNs and peripherical roads. So, what would traffic be on those roads in 2022, if LTNs had not been implemented? It’s tricky to do, but can be done through quasi-experimental methods rather than before-after comparisons, which are of limited use because they don’t account for wider trends (for example, has traffic gone up/down on those roads because traffic has gone up/down across the whole city anyway due to population growth, people no longer working from home, etc? Or whether certain kinds of roads have seen particular trends, e.g. residential roads seeing more traffic from delivery vans.). So the way to do this would be to compare a LTN interior and periphery road with a comparable road (same size, general features, etc) that is not near a LTN. This isn’t perfect for various reasons. But it will show in much, much more convincing ways about the effect of LTNs. 

    

   And my understanding of the few studies there are is that LTNs do indeed reduce traffic immediately on interior roads, and on peripherical roads after a short delay.

   Log In or Register to post comments

3. 20 mph Speed Limits Don’t

   20 mph Speed Limits Don’t Make Sense

   In Tuesday’s edition of the i Newspaper Paul Biggs of the Alliance of British Drivers made a case against 20mph speed limits.
   https://inews.co.uk/opinion/why-20mph-speed-limits-dont-make-sense-1978936
   I found the article to be a terrible piece of journalism and not up to the standard I eaxpect from the i, but on reading it again I found that he was using some of the techniques I use when arguing against mandatory helmet and hi vis use for cyclists. 
   He selectively quoted from various publications, some of which were very credible but then used his own twisted logic to put a false interpretation on them. He also managed to contradict himself within the same paragraph. He did all this while trying to appear to be a reasonable and safety concious motorist.
   Are we as cyclists as guilty as him?
    

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • How many 10s of people in

     How many 10s of people in this alliance ?

     There is no corporate body of cyclists, so if you feel guilty, then change your arguments.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • +1 – there is no “us”.

       +1 – there is no “us”.

       Well OK there is a cycling mafia of lycrist infiltrators, but it’s a secret!

       Of course it’s a little more complicated in the UK because history and current conditions.  There is some self-selection – the fit and the brave.  There is some cameraderie through doing an activity that not everyone does and that can be hard and sometimes unpleasant or dangerous.  There is some selection by “reclaiming the insult” e.g. “you’re complaining about ‘you cyclists …’ – OK, then I’m a cyclist!”.  There are even clubs…

       It may be interesting if psychology or sociology is your thing.  Example article (I can’t post because the link gets broken for some reason by this comment tool) – search “karen liebreich the othering of cyclists” to find it.

       Log In or Register to post comments

     • Let me give you an example

       Let me give you an example
       I am totally agianst mandatory use of Hi Viz for cyclists.
       I can quote half a dozen research papers showing that it confers no / minimum benefits. Some papers which do show benefits are flawed and I will quote these where it suits me. To me this is all part of a robust debate. On my part I take a moral position in which not wearing hiviz reduces the requirement of drivers to look where they are going and leads to victim blame. 
       The cognitive psychology logic backs this up, in a 30mph zone, If a drver can read a number plate at 20 metres how can he fail to see a six foot cyclist at 23 metres regardless of what he is wearing and the ambient conditions?
       Having said that I generally wear bright colours and use daytime lights on the bike.
       What if my arguments lead to a novice cyclist not wearing Hi Viz?

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • charlotte “Around the age of

         charlotte “Around the age of 17 I began wearing hi vis full time just made sense seeing as I needed to wear it to walk!” “The hi vis is a part of my identity but does not define who I am entirely. It makes me feel more conscious of my behaviour, it’s a decision I’m happy I made.”

         

         Isla: ‘my mum taught me about the reasons for wearing it and she encouraged me to research its importance. It’s never enough of a reason to do something just because someone else tells you to. I was able to see the beauty of, and essentially the empowerment of, hi vis.’

         

         Log In or Register to post comments

       • Cycloid wrote:

         Let me give you an example
         I am totally agianst mandatory use of Hi Viz for cyclists.
         I can quote half a dozen research papers showing that it confers no / minimum benefits. Some papers which do show benefits are flawed and I will quote these where it suits me. To me this is all part of a robust debate. On my part I take a moral position in which not wearing hiviz reduces the requirement of drivers to look where they are going and leads to victim blame. 
         The cognitive psychology logic backs this up, in a 30mph zone, If a drver can read a number plate at 20 metres how can he fail to see a six foot cyclist at 23 metres regardless of what he is wearing and the ambient conditions?
         Having said that I generally wear bright colours and use daytime lights on the bike.
         What if my arguments lead to a novice cyclist not wearing Hi Viz?

         — Cycloid

         Hi-viz is not going to help with the vast majority of RTCs. The problem is that drivers that aren’t looking won’t be affected by whether or not someone wears hi-viz. The drivers that complain “I could hardly see you in all that dark clothing and no lights” are actually the ones that are looking and are unlikely to be hitting cyclists/pedestrians. In other words, hi-viz only helps prevent the careful drivers from hitting you, but those aren’t the problem ones.

         Log In or Register to post comments

       • Cycloid wrote:

         [ argument that in general hi-vis ends up being a counterproductive move and it doesn’t necessarily help much specifically ]

         What if my arguments lead to a novice cyclist not wearing Hi Viz?

         — Cycloid

         Following your argument, surely that wouldn’t matter?  Or rather – it would have minimal effect either way?  Unless you have mixed feelings here?  The only issue might be people implying you were being hypocritical.

         Personally I think it’s not unreasonable to complain that attempts to fix health and safety issues at the level of PPE are missing the point and we should be e.g. looking at removing the hazard first – while still donning a hi-vis jacket and wearing a hard hat.

         I’m not a politician though.  Or a psychologist.  I am aware that “argument” and providing facts aren’t necessarily going to change many people’s behaviour either.  So you’ll always lose / get criticised some of the time.  Until “things change” and your detractors of yesterday are suddenly behaving differently / have a different perspective.  (They may also be happy to deploy all your arguments to defend themselves too – without a nod to you or any admission of having “lost” … that’s just humans though).

         Log In or Register to post comments

       • Cycloid wrote:

         What if my arguments lead to a novice cyclist not wearing Hi Viz?

         — Cycloid

         Based on your arguments, the novice cyclist is at no greater risk as a result of having listened to you than if they had not.

         Conversely, if they clad themselves in hi-viz and wear a helmet thinking it keeps them safe then it could lead to a false sense of security or maybe even encourage risk compensation.

         My kids were told never to implicitly trust drivers (or any other road user) to have seen them, including when crossing the local ped crossing and the lights were red. They witnessed people driving through the red light on multiple occasions. In the end they have to make their own decisions as we can’t chaperone them all day.

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • https://twitter.com

           https://twitter.com/SurreyRoadCops/status/1595803520137310208

           “Last night officers arrested a drink driver who had crashed his car into a stationary lorry. He ran from the scene but was caught near by.”

           Lorry should have had hiviz on !

   • If you want a more coherent
     If you want a more coherent argument against 20mph speed limits and the way they are dealt with, I suggest you read the recent Telegraph article at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/11/19/handing-councils-power-fine-speeding-motorists-useless-form/

     In it, top lawyer and road safety campaigner Nick Freeman makes the cogent point that raising money through fines will not work, as wealthier motorists are only really bothered about points on their licence.

     Labour-run local authority Wandsworth is adopting this framework, which will effective decriminalise speeding.

     Mr Freeman has long campaigned for stricter road laws, and is an advocate of adding more accountability in cycling to increase its safety.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • Fuck off

       Fuck off

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • .

         .

         Ah, ya have a convincing way with words, to be sure.

         .

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • Try reading the room.
           Try reading the room.

     • Rakia wrote:

       In it, top lawyer and road safety campaigner Nick Freeman makes the cogent point that… /snip

       — Rakia

       Nigel – is that you?  

        

       Log In or Register to post comments

     • If you want a less coherent

       If you want a less coherent argument against anything related to cycling, I suggest you read Rakia’s posts.

       In them, top troll and anti-progressive campaigner Rakia makes the cogent point that he is Nigel Garage.

       Rakia has long campaigned for nothing, and is an advocate of adding more unaccountability in commenting to increase its covfefe.

       @road.cc, how many times does someone need to get banned from this site before they get a life elsewhere?

       Log In or Register to post comments

     • Rakia wrote:

       road safety campaigner Nick Freeman

       — Rakia

       

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • a1white wrote:

         road safety campaigner Nick Freeman

         — a1white

         

         — Rakia

         Don’t see what’s so funny about it, his wikipedia page says the same – https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Freeman

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • Rakia wrote:

           road safety campaigner Nick Freeman

           — Rakia

           

           — a1white Don’t see what’s so funny about it, his wikipedia page says the same – https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Freeman— Rakia

           Only because you wrote it, BOOBOOBEAKER

         • Time to bring out my (least)

           Time to bring out my (least) favourite Nick Freeman (top lawyer and road safety campaigner) story.

           Freeman who happens to be Jewish was defending a speeding , phone using driver who had killed a pedestrian on a crossing.
           He claimed that the pedestrian (a Rabbi) should have been wearing hiviz, as his traditional black suit camoflaged him.
           https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/nick-freeman-attacked-tragic-rabbis-7222113
           How low can you go

         • FWIW his underlying source is

           FWIW his underlying source is a glossy magazine hagiography, so easily reverted on that basis of an unreliable source – indeed the underlying source of the claim is probably Loophole himself. No doubt that crap will end up being used on the BBC shortly.

         • Steve K wrote:

           road safety campaigner Nick Freeman

           — Steve K

           

           — Rakia

           Don’t see what’s so funny about it, his wikipedia page says the same – https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Freeman

           — a1white

           Only because you wrote it, BOOBOOBEAKER

           — Rakia

           So he did! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1123182267

         • Ooh look, Boobeaker is

           Ooh look, Booboobeaker is unbanned on Wiki and now making sudden changes to Nick Freemans account, which is then referenced by Rakia a day or two later. What a fucking coincidence. 

         • Looks like he got into

           Looks like he got into trouble for disruptive behaviour on Cyclingmikey’s Wiki entry, getting into a bit of a spat for saying Mikey had been aggresive. He even crticises the Wiki article for quoting Road.cc saying it is “poorly sourced”. Sounds exactly like Rakia doesn’t it? 

           https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Smartse (do a search for Booboobeaker on the page)

     • Years ago I worked with a guy

       Years ago I worked with a guy whose surname was Rotherham. Every time he answered the phone he would say ” my name is Rotherham. As in the town Rotherham”. Every single time. Drove me nuts. And that old woman that used to say ” my niece got me this chair from Shackletons you know”. She drove me nuts too. Not one of Ridley Scott’s finest. Actually I don’t think it was him. Sorry.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • That’s wonderful.  It reminds

         That’s wonderful.  It reminds me of an anecdote about the laird of Rattray, I think it was.  Stopped by a non-local police on his way from the big house to the village (such as it is). “Where are you going to, sir?”  “Rattray”.  “And where are you coming from today, sir?” “Rattray”.  “Right, what’s your name?” “Rattray”. “Get in the van”.

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • chrisonatrike wrote:

           That’s wonderful.  It reminds me of an anecdote about the laird of Rattray, I think it was.  Stopped by a non-local police on his way from the big house to the village (such as it is). “Where are you going to, sir?”  “Rattray”.  “And where are you coming from today, sir?” “Rattray”.  “Right, what’s your name?” “Rattray”. “Get in the van”.

           — chrisonatrike

           Reminds me of Police Squad

           https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFhpctuUwb4

       • perce wrote:

         Years ago I worked with a guy whose surname was Rotherham. Every time he answered the phone he would say ” my name is Rotherham. As in the town Rotherham”. Every single time. Drove me nuts. And that old woman that used to say ” my niece got me this chair from Shackletons you know”. She drove me nuts too. Not one of Ridley Scott’s finest. Actually I don’t think it was him. Sorry.

         — perce

         I seem to recall that my gran did have a chair from Shackletons 

         Log In or Register to post comments

     • If you want a more coherent

       If you want a more coherent argument for 20mph speed limits I suggest you ignore everything this dimwitted buffoon ever wtrites. Admittedly I struggle to stay under 20mph on my bike though, so maybe as a slow rider you could show me how, maybe C U Next Tuesday? 

       Log In or Register to post comments

     • Rakia wrote:

       Labour-run local authority Wandsworth is adopting this framework, which will effective decriminalise speeding.

       — Rakia

       In what sense is this “decriminalising” speeding? Enforcement by the local authority is in addition to enforcement by the Met, not instead of it. It’s a crack down on dangerous driving using additional powers granted to the local authority. Hopefully the first of many. If this goes well, I hope that all local authorities will be granted additional powers, to prosecute speeding and dangerous drivers.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • It’s decriminalisation
         It’s decriminalisation because the power is being delegated from the police to the local council – the council enforce and fine drivers for breaking the 20mph, not the police – and the council do not have the power to issue endorsements.

         Not only does this empower people to break the law, it also confirms the already widely held suspicion that motorists are seen as cash cows by government.

         Log In or Register to post comments

   • Cycloid wrote:

     20 mph Speed Limits Don’t Make Sense

     In Tuesday’s edition of the i Newspaper Paul Biggs of the Alliance of British Drivers made a case against 20mph speed limits.
     https://inews.co.uk/opinion/why-20mph-speed-limits-dont-make-sense-1978936
     I found the article to be a terrible piece of journalism and not up to the standard I eaxpect from the i, but on reading it again I found that he was using some of the techniques I use when arguing against mandatory helmet and hi vis use for cyclists. 
     He selectively quoted from various publications, some of which were very credible but then used his own twisted logic to put a false interpretation on them. He also managed to contradict himself within the same paragraph. He did all this while trying to appear to be a reasonable and safety concious motorist.
     Are we as cyclists as guilty as him?

     — Cycloid

     I made it through a couple of paragraphs before getting bored.

     One argument was that as drivers don’t obey the speed limits anyhow, the reduction to 20mph means that average speeds only reduce by 1mph or so (sounds about right for here in Bristol), but I don’t see that it’s particularly relevant. You could just as easily claim that due to the number of RLJers, we should remove all traffic lights.

     It was when the article shifted onto justifying drivers hitting pedestrians as often the drivers will be going less than 20mph, that I decided to stop reading it.

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • I think he’s the guy I saw

       I think he’s the guy I saw being quoted the other week who said we should abolish speed limits, as drivers knew instinctively the correct “safe” speed to drive at.

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • On another forum I was on,

         On another forum I was on, there were a few police officers who popped up. One who did a lot of traffic driving would often say speed limits have to be there as drivers don’t know how to drive properly.

         Log In or Register to post comments

   • As far as I can tell, what

     As far as I can tell, what the evidence shows is the 20mph zones don’t make a difference because drivers ignore them.  That doesn’t mean that reducing speeds would not improve safety, it just means you need to enforce 20mph zones to make them effective.

     Or am I missing something?  (Rakia – please note, I don’t care about your answer to that.)

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • I don’t have it to hand but

       I don’t have it to hand but think there have been several of studies that conclude (earth shattering news) that:

       • If you just change the signs AND there’s minimal enforcement, people’s behaviour doesn’t change much.
       • HOWEVER there is evidence that while the average speed doesn’t e.g. drop below 20mph it does reduce from what it was before e.g. if previously it was 35 mph (because “30mph minimum speed limit”) it reduced to below 30.

       If I recall this came up in arguments to the committee here in Scotland (which still rejected it, “because cars – and people won’t like change” AFAICS).  Think it’s also been debated on here.

       EDIT – a quick google finds the following.  Caveat – not all looking at ALL aspects of course:

       ROSPA’s fact sheet (reasonable detail): https://www.rospa.com/rospaweb/docs/advice-services/road-safety/drivers/20-mph-zone-factsheet.pdf

       https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2019-08/the-state-of-the-evidence-on-20mph-speed-limits-with-regards-to-road-safety-active-travel-and-air-pollution-impacts-august-2018.pdf

       National Institute for Health: https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/alert/twenty-mph-speed-zones-reduce-the-danger-to-pedestrians-and-cyclists/

       Log In or Register to post comments

       • Pretty much that.  People don

         Pretty much that.  People don’t usually look too much for signs, they drive according to the conditions.  Changing a 30 to a 20 and not reducing road width / calming measures / planting trees to visibly narrow it has little to no effect. Speed camera can’t practically be everywhere and unless it’s average doesn’t help much anyway. 
          

          

         Log In or Register to post comments

         • nosferatu1001 wrote:

           Pretty much that.  People don’t usually look too much for signs, they drive according to the conditions.  Changing a 30 to a 20 and not reducing road width / calming measures / planting trees to visibly narrow it has little to no effect. Speed camera can’t practically be everywhere and unless it’s average doesn’t help much anyway. 

           — nosferatu1001

           Minor pedantry here but I think it’s “they drive according to the cues given them by the road and the behaviour of other road users“.  Or even “they only drive slower than the speed limit where there are strong indications that otherwise there would be negative consequences”.

           We all should drive according to the conditions.  However even though it’s night and we’re in a massive rainstorm everyone else is at 70, so … Also “but it was a fast road” (e.g. wide, straight road and/or I see other people going fast).

         • Agreed, I wasn’t precise

           Agreed, I wasn’t precise enough.  
           the subconscious effects of narrowing roads, having them bend and twist etc as the Dutch do is a great indicator of what should be done. Signs do bugger all, especially in an area someone knows well. 
            

           but they’re the cheap option, so no matter how ineffective at achieving the stated aim they are, that’s all we’re getting. 

     • its not quite that, though

       its not quite that, though that is an important point, the study he is quoting actually says if you only put in a small number of 20mph limits, dont bother to enforce them much, and the areas themselves were already either low ksi because of traffic volume, or congested speed, then the KSIs dont change and the 20mph limit doesnt have much of an effect.

       Basically like if you make a pedestrian zone in the centre of town/city, thats for access only and then make it 20mph as well, then theres no statistical change in KSIs compared to the same pedestrian zone if it were set at 30mph.

       if on the other hand you expand the area the 20mph limit applies to say to include all the roads around this pedestrian zone, do bother with enforcement, and it encompasses areas with higher speeding incidences and KSIs, then studies have shown 20mph zones have a very large measurable effect on reducing those KSIs.

       Log In or Register to post comments

   • The Independent/ i Newspaper

     The Independent/ i Newspaper have really gone downhill recently, with lots of “5 things…) and “you won’t believe…” type articles that even the Mail and Express might think twice about.

     Log In or Register to post comments

   • No, us helmet sceptics are

     No, us helmet sceptics are not as guilty as you, and I find your post to be a terrible piece of reporting and not up to the standard I expect from helmet zealots.  We use large scale, long term, scientific, reliable data, helmet promoters use small scale, short term, unscientific, unreliable data.

     Stop tranferring your own lack of confidence onto other people.

     Log In or Register to post comments

4. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk

   https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-63723215

   bbc now on the zebra crossing story – with a bit more local resident background.

   Log In or Register to post comments

5. Be careful out there folks.

   Be careful out there folks. Odd that a cyclist is using the SMIDSY defence, but here it is

   https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/23147462.cyclist-found-guilty-riding-bike-carelessly-fatal-crash/

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • Ok, so motorbike had priority
     Ok, so motorbike had priority, but as both had a green light, not an ‘absolute’ offence, but rather a ‘misjudgement’. In which case it seems odd that the biker’s speed wasn’t considered an issue. The cyclist knew the route well and so presumably knew how much time he would have with an oncoming vehicle at or below the limit. Had this been a pedestrian crossing a main road they were very familiar with, and getting hit by a speeding biker, I think we’d all hope that speed would be seen as a factor. Similarly if it had been the cyclist who came off worst . . . Or have I missed something?

     Log In or Register to post comments

     • I thought it was very odd

       I thought it was very odd that the speed of the motorcycle could not be taken into account. On a dark December morning you can understand misjudgment of a looming headlight when that vehicle was travelling way above the legal limit (never mind what might be appropriate for the conditions). That excessive speed likely to be a major factor in the sad fatality too.

       Log In or Register to post comments

6. another road rage incident –

   another road rage incident – and all for filtering last stationary traffic it seems 

    

   https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/23146360.appeal-motorist-rams-cyclist-hornsey-shocking-incident/

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • nosferatu1001 wrote:

     another road rage incident – and all for filtering last stationary traffic it seems 

      

     https://www.hamhigh.co.uk/news/23146360.appeal-motorist-rams-cyclist-hornsey-shocking-incident/

     — nosferatu1001

     SFB, incredible.  The very fact that drivers think that they can do this and get away with it is a complete condemnation of road law and enforcement.

     Log In or Register to post comments

7. One for wtjs and his love of

   One for wtjs and his love of all things BMW

   https://youtu.be/7yfnYz76KEE?t=153

    

    

   Log In or Register to post comments

   • hirsute wrote:

     One for wtjs and his love of all things BMW

     https://youtu.be/7yfnYz76KEE?t=153

     

     — hirsute

     That picture should have David Attenborough narrating:

     Here we see the adult BMW stopping at the watering hole – a quick break before it goes hunting for prey again

     Log In or Register to post comments

8. Twitter again
   Twitter again
   https://mobile.twitter.com/ian_m_greenwood/status/1595011380981243905
   Survey on road safety.
   Supply answers in one or three words.

   Cyclists, cyclists, cyclists.

   Log In or Register to post comments

9. 33 minutes for a 2k swim is

   33 minutes for a 2k swim is much better than most could do. I think Richie is being a bit hard on himself.

   Log In or Register to post comments

10. The Grotte du Mas d’Azil is
    The Grotte du Mas d’Azil is NOT the only cave in Europe with a road through it. We have one in Asturias – La Cuevona, near Ribadesella.

    Log In or Register to post comments