Fearless Bikes Vulture Titanium frameset

It's true, you aren't feeling yourself any favours wearing black/dark colours, BUT you've got to look, soo many dont and the campaign should be for motorist - look, simple as, it's not hard and drop the speed to, maybe if the police where actually outside rather than on Facebook looking for the naughty words/viewpoints, drivers would be caught speeding, not looking, pulling out, not braking in time, going through red lights, overtaking at a bad time, cutting up cyclists and a lot more..

@Rome73 There are still too many motor vehicles in the central Oxford Street area. There should be zero, except for delivery vehicles at proscribed... prescribed times

@Hollis Jones The crucial difference is the fact that Richardson stopped, exited the vehicle, tried to pull Mr Mullins free and when he couldn't got back in and drove on. He knowingly, actively and voluntarily engaged in the harmful behaviour that caused Mr Mullins' death, which is what made it murder. The hit and run driver hasn't deliberately hit a cyclist and although driving away is of course utterly reprehensible it's only covered by the laws regarding failing to stop at the scene of an accident, which only attracts a six month prison sentence maximum. It's high time the law was changed so that firstly the penalties for failing to stop and render assistance are far higher and secondly so that if the medical evidence is that the victim would have survived with prompt assistance then the driver can be charged with manslaughter or murder. However as it stands murder requires evidence of malice aforethought with an intention to kill or to cause GBH resulting in death. Richardson clearly displayed this by resuming driving even though he knew Mr Mullins was stuck under his car; the hit and run driver in an "accident" didn't have that intention so can't be charged with murder however atrocious their behaviour after the event.

@robgru76 "I am gobsmacked by the number of cyclists I see" So you had no problem in seeing them, what's the issue?

@jaymack I know, sorry! I do accept they deserve some credit for not trying to pass it of as a DBDD but the evidence is so clear it would have been s scandal even by British justice vs cyclists standards if they'd gone for anything below manslaughter.

@Rendel Harris yeah but it could have been spent on widening a few metres of road...

I have worked and socialised around Oxford street for decades. There has been major change in that time - as you would expect in a major metropolis. When I was young you could drive down the whole of Oxford St. When that was stopped everyone screamed the world was going to come to an end. Then it was narrowed in parts to a single lane, the pavements widened and New Oxford Street and Charing Cross road were closed to cars. Everyone screamed the world was going to come to an end. Then Tottenham Court Road was made two way!! And yes, you guessed it, the world was going to come to an end. Then cycle lanes were built all along Gower Street down to Shaftesbury Avenue and the taxi drivers went mental with rage, and the world was going to come to an end. Soho, where I worked for over 10 years, was slowly purged of through vehicles and every time a road was closed or made one way - the world was going to come to an end. But the pedestrian and cyclists increased and so did retail and bars. Thinking back to it, it’s crazy to remember how soho was once clogged with cars, all stuck in self imposed traffic, belching fumes and poison into the narrow streets - until ULEZ and road closures reduced all that. There are still too many motor vehicles in the central Oxford Street area. There should be zero, except for delivery vehicles at proscribed times.

@slc Just read that comment to Mrs H, worryingly she looked thoughtful and said, "Mmm...how nice a bike are we talking here?"

@DrG82 The implementation costs were £32M and there has been an additional £3M spent on adjustments. It's estimated that the savings to the NHS and other bodies in terms of fewer casualties with which to deal come to around £44M. Odd economics where a £9M net saving is a waste of money.

@DrG82 is a liar. First off, who here said they got everything right? "I wouldn’t say that the Welsh government got everything right." The article contains commentary saying they didn't get everything right. I suppose saying something obviously true sets you up to lie later... "They applied the speed limit changes uniformly, without considering exceptions" You are a liar. The Welsh Government guidance contained rules that would allow councils to exempt roads from 20mph. As an example, much of my route into town stayed at 30 and 40mph because my council bothered to apply the exemptions. I particularly enjoyed your unsupported claim of "This has been a massive waste of money". The article states "collisions involving all road users on 20mph and 30mph are down 37 per cent, with casualties dropping by 35 per cent". I'd say a one-off cost of changing road signs for a permanent 1/3rd reduction in collisions is gonna save the taxpayer a chunk of healthcare costs and owners and businesses a chunk of money not fixing car bodywork. Nothing but contempt for you. Take your lies elsewhere.