Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
From: https://www.bristolpost
From: https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/live-bristol-traffic-crash-bedminster-7878883
There are reports of heavy traffic in the Bedminster area of Bristol following a crash involving a Land Rover and a wallI wonder whether the autonomous Land Rover or the wall was more responsible for the crash? Probably 50-50
I’m in several minds.This has the usual UK feel of ‘pushing the envelope beyond sensible’, but OTOH Amazon walking the limits of the infra may help drive development (eg 2m wide cycle tracks at this junction).
The inability to signal is a real problem, and perhaps an offence.
It is about the same size as the invalid carriage micro-cars which are used in NL on cycle infra, but perhaps rather longer. But they work as the infracstructure is generallt adequate, whereas here even the best feels like dial-up internet when broadband had arrived.
I think it’s overall a good thing. The more that motorists have to encounter different vehicles and styles of riding/driving, then hopefully their observation and attention will be improved. Also, there’s the major advantage of not having someone driving a car or van to deliver packages – every little bit helps.
Are those things “e-vehicles” or is the Amazon person pedalling away like crazy?Probably electrically powered. If they wanted to pedal it, then a cargo bike would be a better design. Incidentally, I’m seeing more electrically assisted cargo bikes around my neck of the woods recently – I wonder if that’s got anything to do with the Clean Air Zone (started today).
You’d be following one of them for a while, wouldn’t you? Not easy to overtake…Just go onto the road if you want to overtake them. I do that for e-scooters in bike lanes as it avoids trying to do a close overtake just at the same time as they try to avoid a pothole.
Personally, I don’t mind slower vehicles using segregated infrastructure, but I’m concerned that they have four wheels although they probably present less danger than motorbikes.
I watched this in disbeliefHow are these people allowed to drive ?
Rufford Ford DEEP FLOOD | part 137
I like that there’s a crowd gathered to watch the fun and games and yet drivers think “I can make that, doesn’t look too bad”.
Car registrations could be printed on McDonald’s bags to stop litteringyes please. Sometimes you see two lots of McD’s or other detritus a car’s width apart – two of you literally tossed your rubbish out of the windows and drove off.
https://www.devonlive.com/news/uk-world-news/car-registrations-could-printed-mcdonalds-7861665
We should charge-back companies the costs associated with clearing up the waste they produce. If McDonalds want to put their branding on their packaging, then I don’t see why they can’t be charged for the litter that’s associated with them – they can always just pass the cost onto their customers (who are the ones doing the actual littering anyway).
This is already a thing.You need some extra protection if you’re going to use a bike with no brakes.
Also, how are those jockey wheels staying there? The lack of spokes is worrying too.
I reckon there should be a fixed penalty for inconsiderate driving of £50 and 1 point, with a much lower bar for prosecution than careless (classed as a fault/fail in a driving test) – ideally could be handed out by a civil enforcement organisation so the police and courts are not burdened.A fine of £50 means that it’s only law for poor people. I’d prefer something like a months driving ban.
That’s absolutely correct, I thank you for that Peter ?You’re welcome.
I’m not convinced that a longer prison sentence would work as a deterrent as most people don’t believe that they’ll have a tragic collision (until they do). What I’d much rather see is a lifetime driving ban if a driver is found at fault (wholly or partially) for a collision that takes someone’s life or inflicts life-changing injuries. That way the judge can give them 200 hours community service, but at least they’ll never be on the roads again.
Had a quick look on eBay for
Had a quick look on eBay for 451 tyres and found this: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/304683103358
Just under £33 including postage for a pair.
There’s a selection of other 451 tyres if you have a search (I searched for “Schwalbe 451″). That wheel size is typically used on wheelchairs, though I’m pretty sure I’ve got a unicycle with that wheelsize as I struggled to get a 20″ tyre on until I found out it was a different 20” and found a tyre that fits.
Maybe I’m being too simplistic but manslaughter is “an alternative verdict that can be returned on a prosecution for murder”The without intent to kill still requires another crime to have been committed which is the intent side of things as I see it.
From quiff’s link, the second and third bullet points would not involve intent:
Manslaughter can be committed in one of three ways:
- Killing with the intent for murder but where a partial defence applies, namely loss of control, diminished responsibility or killing pursuant to a suicide pact.
- Conduct that was grossly negligent given the risk of death, and did kill (“gross negligence manslaughter”); and
- Conduct taking the form of an unlawful act involving a danger of some harm that resulted in death (“unlawful and dangerous act manslaughter”).
The term “involuntary manslaughter” is commonly used to describe manslaughter falling within (2) and (3) while (1) is referred to as “voluntary manslaughter”.
I thought manslaughter is for
I thought manslaughter is for killing without intent to kill? It can be due to gross negligence or for causing death whilst performing another illegal act (e.g. bank robbing). Prior intent would surely be classed as murder?
Bung them on EBay
Bung them on EBay
Isn’t there a lot of fuss about how they moved the line over the Cumberland Basin, too, so that cars coming from south Bristol over the basin and then along the Portway toward the motorway will all be charged. Means, I suspect, an increase in traffic using the A369 to get to the motorway…Yeah, I was thinking of the Cumberland Basin when I wrote the Portway. There’s also some concerns about when the Plimsoll Bridge is in use and vehicles are diverted into Bristol.
I’d much rather they just covered the whole of Bristol – why should we continue to put up with health issues caused by old, polluting vehicles?
It will need to generate some money to cover the installation costs of all those cameras and deal with all the many queries this will generate.I’d suggest the approach taken by Parking Eye on this.
What’s your betting on “traders call on Mayor to delay CAZ because reasons” before D-Day?
They may well do, but I think the right to have air that’s not over the legal pollution limits is more important than traders running old vehicles. The majority of vehicles (80% IIRC) won’t be affected by the CAZ as they are sufficiently ‘clean’. I know there’s some fuss about the Portway being included as that will ‘catch’ vehicles that aren’t heading towards the centre, but the air quality along the Portway is particularly dire.