“Drivers will weaponise hatred and take it out on cyclists”: CyclingMikey blasts police on Jeremy Vine show for misinformation about “speed-limits”; Jumbo Visma not “put under pressure” at Tour of Britain; La Pietà at Vuelta + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
"Inaction is a political choice": Withdrawal of support for cycling policies by Labour and Lib Dems, described as a "rug pull", leaves campaigners dismayed
Cambridge’s cycling campaign, Camcycle, has come down strongly on the decisions made by the Liberal Democrats and Labour parties on the current proposals for a Sustainable Travel Zone in Cambridge, which after a “rug pull” by the council yesterday, are now “unlikely to proceed”.
In August last year, the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) announced proposals for a transformational change to the city’s transport network to be developed over the next six years, called ‘Sustainable Travel Zone’, or STZ.
The GCP said that this new transport zone would cut the number of car journeys within Cambridge by a staggering half, with motor vehicle journeys disincentivised with a £5 charge per day for using the zone between 7am and 7pm on weekdays only.
The plane laid out additional charges for other vehicles, LGVs £10 and coaches and HGVs £50. A system of discounts, exemptions and reimbursements would apply to groups including emergency vehicles, blue badge holders, low-income households, some NHS patients and staff, social care workers and zero-emissions, accessible taxis.
The revenue raised was to be used to fund active travel projects as well as buses. An estimated £20 million annually will be available for infrastructure investment.
Sounds a lot like another zone from another city, over which battle lines have been drawn?
> Whose ULEZ is it anyway? Political chicanery as clean air zone set to expand to outer London
Camcyle said: “Inaction is a political choice that will have a detrimental impact on our transport network. It will not address the urgent issues of our growing region including health, pollution, road safety and carbon emissions.
“Cycling has always been, and will continue to be, part of the solution. Camcycle will never stop campaigning for the things that enable more, better and safer cycling, which will in turn deliver benefits for everyone, even those who do not ride themselves.
“To achieve a high-quality, accessible cycle network across our region, it is essential to secure both an increased level of investment in dedicated cycle infrastructure and a reduction in the speed and volume of motor traffic on our roads. Our rural routes should be safe for all ages and abilities, and our urban areas should be places for people not traffic jams.”
The proposed flat fares were due to be introduced from next year, if the plan was approved this summer. When Camcycle members were surveyed in October 2022, 88 per cent were in support of it.
However, after concerns against the plan were raised by the Lib Dems, the Labour group on the council has now voted to withdraw support for the proposals, saying that it was worried about the “impact on low income families”.
Asked how “dead” the plans were, Labour leader of the council, Mike Davey said: “They are not going to go ahead.
“There were bits we liked and bits we remained concerned about. Sustainable travel has not gone away – something is going to have to happen. Something will have to go ahead because we have a problem with congestion in this city, which is only going to get worse.”
> Cambridge cyclists issue impassioned ‘Please stop killing us’ plea
However, Camcycle has not been pleased one bit with the decision.
The group said: “If decision-makers are going to completely give up on this idea, and all the benefits it would have brought, urgent action is needed on alternative schemes that will achieve a reduction in motor traffic and the income for sustainable transport modes that is equal to what the STZ was forecast to achieve.
“What cannot happen is that our region wastes another decade and more millions of taxpayers’ money failing to take action for change. Since 1990, when congestion charging was first discussed, our young people (the majority of whom supported the Sustainable Travel Zone in the 2022 consultation) have been failed. The poorest and most isolated in society have been failed. Our local businesses, strangled by congestion, have been failed. It’s time to turn the tide.”
La Pietà at La Vuelta
This couldn’t get more meta. Jesus Herrada, nonchalantly, unintentionally, and almost perfectly, recreating the iconic Pietà, after winning yesterday’s summit finish stage at La Laguna Negra.
The Pietà, by Anthony van Dyck, 1629, 📸 by @TDWsport pic.twitter.com/lLvQJ02h38
— ArtButMakeItSports (@ArtButSports) September 6, 2023
What an image. If I was two years younger and saw this shot in an indie movie, I would have screamed and raved at the ‘totally subtle and understated’ reference. Now I am doing the same, only with this biblical sport. Oh how things change but stay the same!
Halfords "adversely affected by unfavourable weather and low consumer confidence" as bike sales go down
Halfords, the UK’s largest retailer of cycling products and services, saw its cycling-related sales slump during the middle part of 2023 as motoring filled the void left by the hit to spending in cycling.
> Cycling sales down at Halfords as retailer shifts focus to car repairs
"Interesting tactics" from Thomas De Gendt
On stage 13 you can win my signed jersey. All you have to do is write your name and phonenumber down on a paper and put it in my backpocket while you push me up Tourmalet.
— Thomas De Gendt (@DeGendtThomas) September 7, 2023
While today’s stage is one for the sprinters (or a breakaway?), tomorrow brings another day of pain for the peloton which will be climbing up the spine-tinglingly enchanting Col du Tourmalet. Thomas De Gendt has some interesting tactics up his sleeve, or should I say, backpocket.
Dan Martin says Jumbo Visma haven't been "put under pressure" at Tour of Britain
We all know how quick fans are to turn on their beloved sport if things don’t stay interesting enough for them (aren’t we all a bunch of spoilt brats), with this edition of Tour of Britain, criticised for not being nowhere close to exciting or thrilling.
Yesterday’s live blog was dominated by moaning about the route being too flat, with the same rinse, repeat cycle of a breakaway, Jumbo Visma catching up, and Olav Kooij winning the sprint now on display for four consecutive stages, and as things stand, most likely to continue for two more days.
The Jumbo-Visma Tour of Britain is amazing for the fans?!? Looks like they let a group go, two pro teams ride tempo then win.
— Alistair Rutherford (@mralibongo) September 6, 2023
The social media account of Tour of Britain hit back, saying that “organising cycle races in the UK is harder than ever before” (I wonder why) and “you cannot just stick pins in a map and say ‘we’re going to have a stage there’”.
Now, former Irish pro rider has attributed to cycling fans’ woes while watching the Tour of Britain to other teams not doing enough to push Jumbo Visma.
“To clarify, the councils fund the stages and guide the Tour of Britain routes,” wrote the Tour de France and Vuelta stage winner. “But the course is the course and only Ineos on stage 3 have shown real intent to try mix things up. Jumbo haven’t really been put under pressure otherwise. Hope that changes today.”
To clarify, the councils fund the stages and guide the @TourofBritain routes. But the course is the course and only Ineos on stage 3 have shown real intent to try mix things up. Jumbo haven’t really been put under pressure otherwise. Hope that changes today.
— Dan Martin (@DanMartin86) September 7, 2023
Although he is right (I would point that Danny van Poppel and Sam Bennett have also tried to snatch the sprint victories from TJV), I wonder which teams and riders would have it in them to keep the pace against Jumbo and then try to match the leadouts performed by Wout van Aert?
I wouldn’t be holding my breath for Jumbo Visma to take it easy anytime soon though. Kooij has already matched the record for four consecutive wins, and we know the Dutch team, or any team with that sort of ambition, wouldn’t prefer anything over total domination.
Let’s go for that 𝐟𝐢𝐟𝐭𝐡 one today. 🤭💥 pic.twitter.com/DfaPgafoCC
— Team Jumbo-Visma cycling (@JumboVismaRoad) September 7, 2023
"Things you could put in a Tour of Britain": Suggestions from the couch peloton
Seems like the moaning about Tour of Britain is destined to continue until the race finishes and the victor is decided at Caerphilly (my thoughts with the organisers). Meanwhile, here are some suggestions offered by the couch peloton…
Things you could put in a Tour of Britain:
– a hilly punchy circuit
– a really big hill
– a cobble stage
– a gravel stage
– a flat time trial
– a hilly time trial
– a team time trial
– golden KMs
Things you shouldn’t put in a Tour of Britain:
– six guaranteed sprint stages— Thomas Harvey 🚲 (@_ThomasHarvey_) September 6, 2023
"One of the only safe road cycling routes": Cyclists object to complete closure of "key part" of National Cycling Network
Cycling UK has urged people to oppose the proposed closure, which would force vulnerable road users to use a busy A-road “hemmed in by walls with fast flowing traffic and heavy goods vehicles” as the “only alternative”…
Er, a not-so-good morning, from Birmingham
That’s a few kids in Birmingham signing the late book this morning…
Good morning from Institute Road, the Kings Heath M25. pic.twitter.com/WLwX7UoESp
— Better Streets for Birmingham (@for_birmingham) September 7, 2023
Tyne Valley searches for a "bicycle mayor", after surge in cycling popularity "propelled by the Tour of Britain and Netflix's Tour de France documentary"
After all these years, who would’ve thought a dramatised depiction of Tour de France is what it takes to “propel” cycling in the Tyne Valley? Oh, that and the very exciting ongoing race right now, the Tour of Britain. What, did you think I was going to say the Vuelta?
Did everyone just completely the miss almighty Worlds just over a hundred miles away?
But what comes as a breath of fresh air, the region is looking for a ‘bicycle mayor’ after a “notable increase” in cycling popularity since the Covid pandemic, reports the Hexham Courant.
The position will be a voluntary role designed to ‘help all who ride a bike in the Tyne Valley.’ Currently, there are thirteen bicycle mayors and youth bicycle mayors across the UK and the new recruit will be the fourteenth.
> UK’s first Bicycle Mayor outlines plans to get Cumbria pedalling
The successful candidate would become part of a supportive global network, the Bicycle Mayor Network (BYCS), based in Amsterdam, where the first bicycle mayor was elected in 2016.
Hexham Town Councillor John Ord said: “I am very excited to be part of this search for a bicycle mayor for the Tyne Valley. This is a wonderful area for cycling.
“Since Covid lockdown there has been a notable increase in the numbers of people cycling and we’d like to continue and encourage that trend through the bicycle mayor initiative.
“A Tyne Valley bicycle mayor could promote the environmental and health benefits of cycling especially among traditionally under-represented groups such as women and young people.
“BYCS is especially interested in having applications from minorities, women and students who can spread the message of cycling as fun as well as good for you and the environment.”
Trek reveals plan to accept used bikes and sell second-hand as part of sustainability drive, even if it "means making and selling less"
Trek’s Sustainability Report outlines the brand’s commitment to a more sustainable future, calls for “scepticism” about companies’ net-zero pledges, and commits to ending use of carbon offsets to calculate its carbon footprint…
Wout van Aert launches a solo attack to win stage 5 of Tour of Britain, takes lead in the GC
Surprise surprise!
SURPRISE! 🏆@WoutvanAert solos to win stage five in Felixstowe! #TourOfBritain 🔴🔵⚪️ pic.twitter.com/69CjhvrYhi
— The Tour of Britain 🇬🇧 (@TourofBritain) September 7, 2023
Well that wasn’t half as dull was it? The difference a pure ciclisimo attack can make in a race!
Going offensive on the final kilometre of the stage, the Belgian all-rounder managed to thwart the valiant efforts of the chasing pack, ie. everyone else to bring it home in style, gifting Jumbo Visma its fifth win, although denying Olav Kooik a record-breaking fifth consecutive win at the race.
A work of Aert ⚡#TourOfBritain 🔴🔵⚪ pic.twitter.com/6JIsExZOZt
— The Tour of Britain 🇬🇧 (@TourofBritain) September 7, 2023
There was much drama before the finish too, with the entire team of Jumbo Visma took a wrong turn with just about 10km to go, giving us a glimpse of an unusual mistake from the well-oiled machine of a team.
Ethan Vernon of Soudal Quick-Step, riding in his home race, took second place once again today, followed by Bora Hansgrohe’s Danny van Poppel — the 30-year-old trying everything but still unable to beat Jumbo Visma.
And with this late attack, Van Aert has now opened up 3-second lead over his rivals. There’s just one more flat stage left, before the hills start creeping in, and then the mouth-watering finale finish at the Caerphilly hill climb. Could this Tour of Britain be finally getting interesting?!
Perks of an electric car...
Now before anyone loses their minds, this is in no way road.cc endorsing or opposing EVs, but just some playful mockery of some, ahem, other uses of EVs.
The Italian Job (almost ruined by British Airways): Cross-Europe charity riders' bikes misplaced by airlines transit
A charity cycle ride by 14 cyclists from south England were flying to Milan to kick off their Italian Job challenge in aid of Cancer Research UK.
However, their Italian job was almost put in jeopardy by British Airways, after 11 of the team’s bikes were lost in transit.
The charity said the bikes had since been located at Heathrow Airport and were brought out to Italy where – with some last-minute planning – they were reunited with the riders at Lake Como, reports the BBC.
British Airways, meanwhile has blamed “operating constraints”, saying: “We’re very sorry our customers’ bikes were delayed last night.
“Our teams have worked hard behind the scenes and the customers have now been reunited with their bikes in Milan. We wish everyone taking part in the cycling challenge the best of luck.”
The riders will join other fundraisers for the Italian Job challenge, cycling from Rome to London.
Cancer Research UK’s Elisa Mitchell said earlier the charity had been told the high-spec racing bikes were left on the tarmac at Heathrow and not loaded on to the plane bound for Milan.
She said the debacle was “really disappointing” but insisted the cyclists had remained “stoic”. “Their attitude was ‘it’s not going to stop us – whatever is thrown at us, we will continue’,” she said.
Sebastián Molano puts up a brutal sprint to win stage 12 of Vuelta a España
Vamos was the cry as Colombian sprinter Juan Sebastián Molano beat the green jersey Kaden Groves to the line at a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it sprint on stage 12 of Vuelta.
🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨
🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨🟨
🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦
🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦🟦
🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥
🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥🟥
🏆 𝙎𝙀𝘽𝘼𝙎𝙏𝙄𝘼́𝙉 𝙈𝙊𝙇𝘼𝙉𝙊⚡️ … es el más rápido!
🥇 … proves fastest on the day!🚴♂️ @TeamEmiratesUAE#LaVuelta23 pic.twitter.com/z1E8r2Voin
— La Vuelta (@lavuelta) September 7, 2023
Alpecin-Deceuninck, after doing the hard work for most of the final kilometres of the stage today, found its star sprinter from Down Under Kaden Groves boxed in, who suffered a mechanical as well.
In a sprint dominated by the gusts coming from the right, Alpecin, just like most other teams, decided to be on the left. However, that left the entire road open to attack by the rampaging Portugese Rui Oliveira from UAE Emirates, leading out Molano, with precious space opening up for launching the final sprint.
Groves, tried to make space for himself, and in the process, ended up hitting the wheel of his teammate from behind in what could have ended very, very badly for everyone. But he managed to get going and once he was away, he was once again, unsurprisingly, very quick, almost catching up with Molano in the final hundred metres.
But the 28-year-old Colombian would hold on to take the victory in Zaragoza, his first at a Grand Tour, hugging and embracing teammate Oliveira who couldn’t hide his emotions after allowing his teammate to sprint to victory, saying: “F***, this almost feels like my win!”
¿Quién estaba más feliz? ¿@roliveira57 o @sebasmolano_ ?
Who was happier? Sebas or Rui? @TeamEmiratesUAE #LaVuelta23 pic.twitter.com/cUuE6rSe1n
— La Vuelta (@lavuelta) September 7, 2023
Molano said: ”This victory is for my team, for my family. Very happy to win a stage in Vuelta and to get a win against such a strong team like Alpecin. We’ve got GC guys too, who need to be looked after first, but I’m delighted to win in front of so many Colombian fans. I dedicate my victory to them!”
Groves, who cut a dejected figure at the finish line, rued his chances, and will now have to wait for his third victory at this Vuelta until Madrid.
“Not too much to say, the team did a fantastic job. UAE came with the momentum and my chain dropped, so nothing I could do. Unlucky mechanical, could’ve been win number three! But we’re still in the hunt for points,” said Groves.
Juan Sebastián Molano wins Stage 12 of #LaVuelta23 after a perfectly timed sprint finish! ⚡️ pic.twitter.com/Q7EbskcYxb
— Eurosport (@eurosport) September 7, 2023
Now, the ruthless GC battle resumes tomorrow, as the peloton will finish at the top of the iconic Col du Tourmalet in tomorrow’s stage. Kuss will still be riding in red, ahead of UAE’s Marc Soler, Soudal Quick-Step’s Remco Evenepoel, and Jumbo Visma’s Primož Roglič.
"Drivers will weaponise this hatred and take it out on cyclists": CyclingMikey goes to the Jeremy Vine show and blasts police force spreading misinformation about "speeding" riders
Ahoy, the “cyclists breaking the speed-limit” debate ship is still sailing!
It all kicked off earlier this week when Devon and Cornwall Roads Policing Team took to Twitter to call out a group of cyclists in Dartmoor who were apparently breaking the speed limit, despite it not applying to them.
road.cc had reached out to the policing team, who told us that “on this occasion, road safety advice was given to a group of cyclists and no offences were recorded” and “the engagement – which carried a road safety, not speed enforcement, message – was received positively by the group”.
So we all thought it was just a case of either a poorly worded misadventure into the cyclists’ speed-limit policing territory, or a genuine mistake by the team unaware of the Highway Code. The police held to account, we hope the mistake wouldn’t be repeated again, and water under the bridge.
Right? Wrong.
Since then, it has grabbed the attention of the UK public, and been covered by almost all mainstream national media, with just the original video by the police team’s account (with 12k followers) having been viewed over 2 million times.
> The Independent gets involved in “cyclists speeding” debate
They weren’t breaking the law. The speed limit doesn’t apply to cyclists. That’s probably quite reasonable when a bicycle weighs maybe 10kg and an average car 1.5-2 tonnes.
— CyclingMikey the Unspeakable (@MikeyCycling) September 3, 2023
Mike van Erp, the London cyclist and cycling safety advocate, better known by his alter-ego Cycling Mikey, had earlier replied to the police’s tweet saying that the cyclists weren’t breaking the law and that “that’s probably quite reasonable when a bicycle weighs maybe 10kg and an average car 1.5-2 tonnes”.
And this morning, Mikey was on the Jeremy Vine show on Channel 5, talking about the issue. And boy, did he not mince his words.
> ‘Speeding cyclists’ talk reaches (very tired) day three thanks to a loophole-loving lawyer
“For me, the UK is perhaps the most hostile country in Europe to cycle in,” said CyclingMikey. “There are a lot of people who didn’t know that speed limits don’t apply cyclists, and a lot of people who got very angry about those cyclists.”
“My huge worry really is that some drivers will weaponise this hatred and take it out on cyclists in the UK”.
“The UK is perhaps the most hostile country in Europe to cycling.”@MikeyCycling is concerned drivers will take out “weaponised” hatred on people using bicycles because they think they don’t obey the law.@theJeremyVine | #JeremyVine pic.twitter.com/zRpcK2jLeq
— Jeremy Vine On 5 (@JeremyVineOn5) September 7, 2023
Vine, not unfamiliar with Mikey, having edited a few of his videos himself, asked him if he mean that people are going to see the film posted by Devon and Cornwall Roads Policing Team and think that cyclists don’t obey the law, so “we don’t have to respect them”.
Mikey replied: “Exactly. It’s already a case that people think cyclists don’t obey the law, but the reality is different. Studies from two different countries found that cyclists are very similarly law abiding as drivers, and maybe even more so.”
He elaborated a little more on his reply to the force, saying that the BMW car in which the police were travelling in, would have 30 times the energy of a cyclist upon impact. “They [cyclists] have far less momentum and transfer far less momentum to something else in the event of a collision, simply because they are so much lighter,” he said.
Blimey, will this debate ever die?
“There’s a particular arrogance cyclists have that they can do no wrong.”
💬 @y_alibhai worries for the safety of people on the pavement.
💬 @MikeyCycling says bikes should be wary as pedestrians are “top of the road hierarchy”.@theJeremyVine | #JeremyVine pic.twitter.com/XAclVrI3b6
— Jeremy Vine On 5 (@JeremyVineOn5) September 7, 2023
Mikey also spoke about pavement riding and the priority pedestrians have in the road safety hierarchy.
“We cyclists shouldn’t be on the pavements unless it’s a shared use pavement, and be super careful around pedestrians,” he said. “Part of the reason why cyclists ride on pavements is the fear of drivers and the relatively poor and primitive infrastructure we have in the UK.”
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
65 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
"All that's required is an to roads policing" - that's a big all... Although no doubt the "idiots just keep coming" aspect does apply: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cz9lel2wz93o "Man charged after car crashes through bowling alley" - luckily they only skittled over skittles.
Almost any change to roads and streets is accompanied by a period of heightened danger, and in the UK "look out for cyclists" will need to be learned... practically. And over the time it takes for cyclists to become a regular feature. OTOH once (if...) good designs are in and frequent enough such that drivers encounter them AND the cyclists on them regularly (another big if) I don't think they should be much more difficult than a footway to deal with. These things are all over NL - don't have the collision stats but they should. (NL isn't perfect but collecting info on the safety of designs to feed back into better designs as required is part of the "sustainable safety" philosophy - if they're really a killer I think they'd be altering these.)
I'm in the happy position of agreeing with everybody here! I've never considered a bike with a stand, yet I'm impressed by the ingenuity and adaptability of this axle. I tow a Yak Bob with a Robert Axle, employing my El Cheapo Vitus gravel bike and I just have to be very careful where I stop. Hedges are generally a dead loss, and I seek walls, telegraph poles and signposts and generally lean the widest part of the Bob against it. One very awkward task is removing the two steel pins which lock the trailer arms onto the special mounting slots on the Robert axle, and when you have one out, the sodding weight in the trailer can twist the whole caboodle and bend the Bob fitting before you can get the other out and unhitch. I doubt if a stand would help with that. You can imagine that this combo is a real pain when you have to get it over the bridge at railway stations, and it nearly resulted in Merseyrail nearly parting me and the trailer on the platform from the bike on the train. It's a long story for another time. Another axle example recently featured on here, with a 12mm front axle bearing the Herculean weight limit of a monster American front rack.
This has nothing to do with the type of bike - it's the type of behaviour that's the problem. Banning the sale of such bikes will not curtail the behaviour. They'll just find another type of vehicle and continue to drive dangerously as there's such a lack of enforcement. I'd sooner see them ban the bally. But really, all that's required is an improvement to roads policing.
The EAPC Bill is welcome, but full of holes. What's to stop an overpowered but temporarily limited e-bike being sold and subsequently delimited? This is often a trivial process.
@KiwiMike Yeah, in my over four decades of riding all over Europe I've never 'been for a ride in the countryside'. That must be it. Or, and I know this is a wild concept, you just accept that I just voiced my personal experiences and never missed a kickstand, like I wrote. Anyway, what's the big horror of laying your bike on its side for the very few occasions where there is nothing to lean your bike against?
They may have looked, but did they see?
Ds2025: where they are going wrong is that they are crushing the motorbike rather than the person sat on top of it. If they did the latter this issue would be solved in less than 24 hours.
I came this way today with the car boot sale in operation. There was a marshal at the entrance, who stopped a car turning right across the cycleway as I was approaching. So that certainly works. I think it necessary for the marshal to be there, I couldn't say if the driver would have turned if he hadn't been there but you always have to suspect the worst. Unfortunately there is no marshal at the exit, and there was certainly a car stopped across the cycleway as I was approaching it. But he pulled onto the road before I reached it, and the following car stayed off the cycleway as I went through. Ideally there should have been a marshal there too. On the whole, though, it's a really high standard piece of infrastructure. Just a pity it doesn't extend a bit further.
“absolute carnage” So right! Just look at the bodies piled up, blood running in the gutters and injured people limping away. It's a bit of a problem with a road, delaying some people for minutes at a time: it isn't carnage, let alone 'absolute carnage'. Anyone who exaggerates so ridiculously really shouldn't be allowed to comment in public, unless they want to demonstrate their idiocy to all and sundry.
65 thoughts on ““Drivers will weaponise hatred and take it out on cyclists”: CyclingMikey blasts police on Jeremy Vine show for misinformation about “speed-limits”; Jumbo Visma not “put under pressure” at Tour of Britain; La Pietà at Vuelta + more on the live blog”
Clever tactic by Thomas De
Clever tactic by Thomas De Gendt https://twitter.com/DeGendtThomas/status/1699706282142298619
Riding in this morning I
Riding in this morning I stopped at the end of a queue of cars approaching some temporary traffic lights. There are roadworks in my lane, so there are three-way lights controlling traffic onto a pair of mini roundabouts. The lights changed and the traffic moved forward.
As I reached the actual lights they turned to amber – I knew I didn’t have time to clear the whole ‘controlled’ area before they go red, so I stop. As I put my foot down on the ground, a van and two cars speed past me from behind…
On the positive, I watched a squirrel carrying an apple across a zebra crossing and try to go through a gate into the car park for the university chaplaincy building. It couldn’t fit, the apple was too big, so it moved right and tried the next gap (with no success, the bars on the gate were evenly spaced, obviously). It did it again, and again, turned to go back the way it had come, but then turned back and – quite by chance, I think – ran around the end of the gate
Per this clip:
Per this clip:
(and my own comment on the video)
the police do take action if the evidence is clear.
the police do take action if
the police do take action if the evidence is clear
Maybe yours do (although watch out for them claiming to ‘take action’ and then doing nothing) but they don’t here, no matter how good the evidence.
https://upride.cc/incident/t90jdt_audiwithcaravan_rljatspeed/
@wtjs
@wtjs
Yeah, I guess I should re-word it to “the police may take action…”.
The irony is that I’d only
The irony is that I’d only waited at the lights instead of walking the bike on the footway to demonstrate that cyclists don’t RLJ…
Ha ha I do this too.
Ha ha I do this too.
Slightly dissapointed this
Slightly dissapointed this isn’t a clip of a squirrel with an apple.
As I reached the actual
As I reached the actual lights they turned to amber – I knew I didn’t have time to clear the whole ‘controlled’ area before they go red, so I stop. As I put my foot down on the ground, a van and two cars speed past me from behind…
Even if you’d been filming and they’d ‘become established at red’, the police wouldn’t have been interested in cars passing lights at red ‘because everybody does it’
https://upride.cc/incident/ye10aju_mini_redlightcross/
https://upride.cc/incident/fd67nej_bmw420_redlightcross/
“Inaction is a political
“Inaction is a political choice”
It’s odd that people think doing nothing is not a choice.
Had this sort of debate in the local rag (well, as much as you can). Apparently pushing for active travel is imposing your will on others when you know nothing about them.
Whereas doing nothing apparently isn’t a choice and isn’t imposing your will on others (more congestion, pollution, health issues, traffic collision damage).
Exactly this, we seem very
Exactly this, we seem very reluctant as a society to point this out. I suppose it’s the very definition of “laissez-faire” which is of course a choice.
“Inaction is a political
“Inaction is a political choice”
It is not easy. The voters (or some voters) are so quick to baulk at the idea of changes affecting driving. What we might see as “positive change to promote better places, more efficient travel, health etc.” many clearly see as a less than zero-sum game. It’s not “inaction” to them (though they’ll continue to moan about the roads). They’ll see it as not deliberately choosing to ruin everyone’s lives for … a handful of cyclists?
We can’t regulate cars, because (somewhat) poor people have cars*.
Photo ops in quiet streets with people walking about, mums and children on bikes…
Like shouty people who are rich enough to run a car but “poor” – actually, we’re not really fussed about those either. It’s the middling folks writing strongly worded letters / threatening to take us to court, local businesspeople, all the other councillors who drive …
… and it always will. Because we can’t get beyond seeing this as a political landmine which we’ll only tackle if we absolutely have to. After all the other issues have been sorted. Which is never.
* You might think that a councillor would ask “what do people need to get around for, and how best to facilitate that given the other goals”. This is clearly too advanced though. You might think a Labour representative would at least ask “and why are the incomes so low?”. Unfortunately I bet the answer is always “x years of Tory cuts!” which doesn’t really advance the plot here.
It does seem that low income
It does seem that low income families (obviously, as you say, not defined in any way) are a bit of a political football at the moment. I don’t know how it is in Cambridge but in general poorer areas have very low turn out in the elections. That would suggest they do not feel represented by any of the political parties. In that case, it would be better to hear directly from the “low income families” rather than those claiming to be representing their interests. Perhaps they would understand that needing to own a car to get to the shops is an imposition and would actually get the most benefit from improved public transport.
Is it even simpler, that
Is it even simpler, that powers (autocrats, parties of all hues) have a long history of threatening others with the lumpenproletariat? Times past (mostly) this was directly, as a large force of “desperate people”. Or more subtly, like e.g. Belarus encouraging migrants and then pushing them across the borders to Poland.
As you say the poorest seem to vote less and aren’t normally in a position to e.g. fund politicians. I’m sure some folks do mean what they say about helping people. However there are few saints in real life, plus those at the bottom of the pile may have identified that their problem is – at least partly – those in better positions who wish to remain there!
Looks like Birmingham could
Looks like Birmingham could do with getting rid of those cycle lanes to make more room for cars. Look at all those cyclists, stopping the drivers from getting where they need to go.
I wonder how much clearer the
I wonder how much clearer the road was just a week ago before the schools went back? Probably still not a pleasant experience, but I imagine it was at least moving
Probably much quieter, which
Probably much quieter, which begs the question: how many of those journeys could have been made by bike? In an urban environment you’re maybe, what 15 mins from a high school max, significantly less from a primary school.
When I walk my kids to school
When I walk my kids to school (not in Birmingham) about half way along the ten minute walk, we pass a family getting into their people carrier. We then see the same family getting out of the people carrier, dropping their kids off at the same school we are going to.
It depresses me every time I see it.
HoldingOn wrote:
I will always remember walking from my house down to the takeaway in the village, this one time. Maybe a five/ten minute walk. I passed a bloke a few houses down getting into his car. When I arrived at the takeaway, he was getting out of his car…
I fear hearing to
I fear hearing to CyclingMikey on the Jeremy Vine show is more likely to promote hatred of cyclists than D&C constabulary’s tweet.
Just so I know I’ve got this
Just so I know I’ve got this right. Drivers are angry (presumably at the government) because speed limits don’t apply to cyclists and simultaneously angry with cyclists for not sticking to speed limits. That’s a lot of anger issues.
Drivers can barely conceal
Drivers can barely conceal their daily disappointment with the actual driving experience vs a mixture of nostalgia for past times, flukey times when there was no one around and the odd car ad.
Anything can then be the focus of all this excess energy, not least a cyclist doing the speed limit (or not) keeping up with them. Driver non-compliance with speed limits and a range of other rules occurs on an industrial scale but, notwithstanding this backdrop it’s always “I saw cyclist… doing x”
where x = too slow, on the pavement, too fast, not on the pavement, etc
David9694 wrote:
Car adverts are particularly odd.
I have never seen one where the cars are “stuck in traffic” in an urban environment – they are always completely empty cities like the beginning of 28 Days Later or else Wide Open Spaces.
(edit) Actually, I can recall one ad I’ve seen where the cars are barely moving. A recent one for some mini SUV thing, with the USP for the vehicle being that “the driver is sat high up so has good visibility” I think…
Absolutely!
Absolutely!
Can’t find it but IIRC a while back there was an article here on a German chap who’d done just that as commentary. (“Good for traffic jams!”)
And there was this:
Cycling Mikey is on GMB
Cycling Mikey is on GMB tomorrow at 725. Apparently some arsehole lawyer is going to be on too.
“Can you get me off this NIP for dangerous driving on some technicality?
I mean, that is your approach to road safety?”
Hirsute wrote:
If he says we need legal parity between bikes and cars, can someone please ask him if that means motors limited to 250W and cutting out at 25kph.
Nice to see there’s one news
Nice to see there’s one news outlet that we can trust to encourage safer behaviour on our roads ….
https://www.gbnews.com/news/ulez-fines-dodged-britons-trick-sadiq-khan-cameras
Turns out it’s all you bloody
Turns out it’s all you bloody cyclists fault that my local council is now bankrupt, I hope you’re all ashamed of yourselves! (The DM wouldn’t lie to me right?)
Furious locals slam bankrupt Birmingham council for wasting £10million on 2.5-mile cycle highway that is wider than a bus lane, barely used and causes traffic chaos
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12491087/Furious-locals-slam-bankrupt-Birmingham-council-wasting-10million-2-5-mile-cycle-highway-wider-bus-lane-barely-used-causes-traffic-chaos.html
Back to reality for a moment, I’m feeling a little guilty that I’ve only used this infra a couple of times. It’s not too bad but i just rarely go that way.
NOtotheEU wrote:
Reminds me of Alexei Sayle’s definition: “Austerity is the idea that the 2008 financial crash was caused by Wolverhampton having too many libraries.”
Wait – they’ve managed to get a wide cycle path 2.5 miles long (at all!) for 10 million? Can we get them up here? In 2019 Sustrans quoted £1.3 million per kilometre for a “high specification cycle path” – but a decent sized project like that will likely be lots more because junctions. £50 million per kilometre back then to build the average road of course…
It’s not wide all the way and
It’s not wide all the way and at some points it’s just a shared use pavement but apart from the point where it goes from one side of the dual carriageway to the other with no signage (that I’ve noticed) it’s a good start.
I think AlsoSomniloquism said they use it regularly but I’ve only been on it 3 or 4 times.
Yep it is my route. If I’m on
Yep it is my route. If I’m on my hybrid* I use it and it is used regularly by delivery cyclists coming in for shifts and others. Typical of the DM to take the one section with “queueing traffic” and blame the bike lane for it when it happens to be leading to traffic lights and a section which has no actual changes to the road layout at all.
*If I’m on my road bike I don’t simply because there is still a bus lane which I can use to go faster as most of it is used by pedestrians rather then the pavement running next to it.
Looks like Birmingham really
Turns out Birmingham really is a dump after all. Levelling Up and that 350m a week should sort the problem.
BIRMINGHAMisaDUMP wrote:
I read something in the news which said that Birmingham’s financial problems “could” be laid at the door of their having paid humongous amounts of money hosting the Commonwealth Games. The games that various states – not just cities! – around the world have announced that they cannot afford to run.
Didn’t it all start from “we
Didn’t it all start from “we don’t need to give women the same incentives to work (like money) as we do men”? That’s hardly unique to Birmingham of course. Nor was their response to a hundred or so women making a discrimination claim: “Settling up would be expensive! Let’s go to the courts instead”. Followed by a lengthy wrangle about time limits (and presumably cash spent defending previous discrimination) which finally ballooned into “Oh no! The courts now say that lots of women (not just the hundred or so initial claimaints) could be due the money we didn’t bother to pay them! That’s far more expensive!”
However Socialist Worker says it’s really the Tory cuts wot did it and spineless Labour not fighting them, so I guess opinions vary.
Most of what you mentioned
Most of what you mentioned was under a NOC (Con-LibDem Coalition) council. Yes 10 years later it should have been proritised but as you mentioned, the payments were due at a time central government were making cuts. It would have been interesting, if we hadn’t just voted Labour back in whether Eric Pickles would have bailed us out at the time when asked. The council has tried to raise money by selling their crown jewels (NEC sold for £300mil in a rush to raise funds and then was sold again a few years later for £800mil)
£184mil is quoted as the
£184mil is quoted as the councils cost for the CW games, although that is also partners as well. There were several businesses and local Uni’s who were quoted as “partners” on the advertising gumph so maybe not all of that was council money. The whole thing was £800mil or so. Victoria had it listed as £1.1billion but as high as 3-4billion so not sure why the massive jump. It might be that we already had most buildings and usage, Alexander Stadium just needed some temp stands, Edgbaston for Cricket, Brum Uni and NEC as other places. It was only the Swimming centre which needed building and originally it was looked at the Uni as they had a new pool built but the capacity wasn’t there. Only the track cycling was outside the area.
BIRMINGHAMisaDUMP wrote:
Birmingham’s a dump and politicians lie. Hard to disagree with that.
CyclingMikey is right. Yu
CyclingMikey is right. Yu only have to see the bile and hatred spewed on social media by motorists directed at cyclists to realise that there are drivers out there who already justify their behaviour towards cyclists when behind the wheel based on such comments and stories. Most of us who ride will regularly experience negative interactions with drivers – gestures, shouts, horn blasts at the milder end of the spectrum. All fuelled by stories that boil down to “bloody cyclists, pay no road tax, ride through red lights, hold up traffic and speed.”
We all need as a nation and
We all need as a nation and roadusers to start respecting each other and both sides need to apply common sense.
Their are noisy/vociferous minorities on both sides who love to stir up trouble and its up to the majority of road users to show respect to one another.
Lets give each other time and space and show patience to each other.
I cycle, drive tractors and a van so on two of my modes of transport im slower but we just need to respect one another a drive sensibly.
Apply common sense ?
Apply common sense ?
You don’t use common sense for the highway code, you have to read and understand it. Far too many drivers have little or no knowledge of the HC
Watching various dash cam videos, far too many drivers have no appreciation of hazards or how to mitigate them.
Hirsute wrote:
Documents like the HC exist precisely because of a failure of ‘common sense’.
And anyway, far too much of the time “it’s just common sense” is used to mean “what I agree with/approve of”…
Yeah – using the roads – and
Yeah – using the roads – and especially driving motor vehicles – is a learned skill.
The arguments about “respect” or “why can’t we all just get along?” correctly recognise an aspect of human nature in driving. It’s seems reasonable for people to do so in that case* because driving’s ubiquitous (by political choice!) and so normalised we effectively treat it like walking or other use of public space, not like other licensed activities. So people apply the same expectations around the emotional needs of humans and effects on their behaviour (impatience, convention, politeness etc.)
However it is not just a case of influencing behaviour in the same way as a politician or an advert might try (“don’t drop gum!”). That’s because of power imbalances (car vs. bike vs. pedestrian) and the skill aspect. That needs training, feedback loops to reinforce practice and physical changes to the environment in many cases. Which makes changing things subtly different (and more involved) than just exhortations around behaviours.
Trying to alter things via law change / policing things better also has limitations here since on the roads lots of things are happening to millions of people all the time. And the timescales are very short.
I do think we should got a bit further [1] [2] [3] in terms of “human factors” e.g. trying to work with human nature. For the fallible drivers of motor vehicles we have improved things via *lot* of work on “user interface design”, driver assistance, in-car safety, safer infrastructure for driving etc. Of course drivers are “customers” – of manufacturers, oil / power companies and the government sees them as enhanced taxpayers. (Although I think they’re still getting a net subsidy if you sum all the costs and benefits!)
* Consider – “you can’t expect all pilots to wait for clearance for takeoff…”
Im talking about using common
Im talking about using common sense in your life and on the road. Do you not understand my point life is about using common sense and showing respect and courtesy to others?
That im afraid is sadly missing in a percentage of our country now.
I understand that you are
I understand that you are just throwing in the term ‘common sense’.
What is the connection with common sense and the HC ?
You do realise that sufficient numbers think might is right and that faster road users should have priority over slower users (even those sticking to the limit).
Stephankernow wrote:
I agree, but it’s important to remember that the two “sides” aren’t equivalent.
One side has genuine issues with road safety and endangerment due to other people’s selfish and distracted behaviour. The other side makes up imagined laws and rules and then complains that they’re not being followed.
Yes but this us and them
Yes but this us and them attitude by both groups and its only a minority on both sides is part of the problem.
Tne breakdown in respect in this country toward one another in all spheres of life is a problem.
Its down to the individual to make a personal decision.
Stephankernow wrote:
Hmm… but when it’s 10 of “them” to every one of “us” … not much we can do to “win hearts and minds” *. (I know, most cyclists are also drivers – but most drivers and their passengers are not also cyclists).
Is “respect” is a separate magic ingredient that can be added or more like a consequence emerging from other factors? To what extent would you respect those who are uninterested in returning the favour?
* AFAIK psychology suggests that once stereotypes exist they’re extremely hard to overcome. Humans preferentially collect evidence to confirm things they believe rather than looking at all evidence. Worse, we may actively seek out such confirmatory evidence. Changing these beliefs seems to be a “one at a time, through building personal relationships” business. Slow and very difficult when you’re the minority!
Stephankernow wrote:
Well, let’s start with not maiming or killing each other on the roads and go from there.
I agree, but it’s important
I agree, but it’s important to remember that the two “sides” aren’t equivalent.
One side has genuine issues with road safety and endangerment due to other people’s selfish and distracted behaviour. The other side makes up imagined laws and rules and then complains that they’re not being followed.
[/quote]
That’s some pretty sweeping generalizations right there. Not only unhelpful but unless you have some data to back it up I’d suggest it is FUD just to get you likes on this platform.
House!
House!
C’mon… it’s Friday
C’mon… it’s Friday afternoon! Can’t be producing volumes of evidence from the media, nor links to peer reviewed publications every day of the week!
Or… you could just search road.cc for a cargo-bike-load of the same. But that would likely be some kinda logical glitch, like failing to look at both positive and negative evidence for a particular theory.
Happy cycling anyway, too good to stay in!
Bradshsi wrote:
I can’t be bothered to go looking for the data again as your suggestion of FUD is risible.
Think about it. How many motorists are worried about being injured or killed by a collision with a cyclist? Compare that to how many cyclists are worried about being injured or killed by a collision with a motorist.
Ask around any cyclists you know and see if cyclists have been on the receiving end of abuse that has been factually incorrect (e.g. “You have to use the bike lane”, “you don’t even pay road tax”). Similarly, you can ask around drivers and see if they commonly get abuse from random cyclists for no discernable reason (i.e. the cyclist doesn’t have a valid complaint of being close-passed etc).
Or, to put it another way, do you think cyclists have a valid concern about their safety? Do you think motorists have a valid concern that there is a war on motorists? (hint: society subsidises car usage to a large extent and tends to treat them as the only important traffic).
By all means, find the KSI rates of different modes of transport and adjust for the different sizes of categories to see if I’m incorrect about cyclists hardly ever killing motorists whilst motorists do kill far too many cyclists.
I found this site that shows
I found this site that shows the fatalities by road user type per billion km travelled: https://www.statista.com/statistics/300601/average-number-of-fatalities-according-to-transport-in-the-united-kingdom/
Unfortunately it doesn’t show the causes or involvement of other vehicles (that would be more instructive), so it includes single vehicle crashes and also collisions between same types of vehicles (e.g. crashes between cars or crashes between cyclists).
Cyclists are at 19.8 and car occupants are at 1.1, which definitely supports my assertion that cyclists are at more risk than car passengers. (Motorbikes would appear to be the most dangerous mode of transport with pedestrians in second place, just slightly ahead of cyclists).
Ah, but once they’re out of
Ah, but once they’re out of their cars pedestrians are nervous about cyclists! Barely a month goes by but someone says “some wheel-mounted desperado nearly did for me”.
Statistics vary (probably because the numbers are small) but pedestrians and cyclists seem to be a similar risk to each other. Vans and LGVs would appear to be the velociraptor on the roads (by distance travelled) – likely mostly due to usage patterns [PACTs stats analysis].
In an ideal world (or just a hundred miles or so from the UK’s East coast) it would just be people, behaving normally. So reacting emotionally, telling you how the world seems to them (and possibly having a part of the picture right). And everyone similarly concerned about getting from A to B safely however they did. Not a zero-sum game.
Due to our previous political choices however those who cycle on the roads in the UK not only form an “out-group” (or series of them) to many other people – they don’t quite resemble the profile of the rest of the population (also data here varies but e.g. much more likely to be male [also see Sustrans’ walking, cycling and wheeling survey]!). (If nothing else because most tend to have a keener appreciation for the vagaries of driving!)
The lack of equivalence is not just numbers of course. I believe motor traffic / road provision also has a suppressive effect on other modes (for some of the reasons listed below; because once you’ve opted in to having a car a journey is “marginal cost”; because you tend to keep using your car for subsequent journeys once you’ve got into it). Motorised traffic is also catered for at the expense of other modes despite its negative side effects. A couple of those are regularly cited (“pollution”, “danger” and sometimes “congestion”) but others are less considered, like noise [road noise a major stressor according to the WHO], extremely inefficient use of space, expense to the taxpayer in general, disconnecting communities…
Thanks – the PACTs analysis
Thanks – the PACTs analysis was the one I was failing to find as it clearly shows the level of danger posed by different road users, though it doesn’t apportion blame e.g. a collision between a pedestrian and cyclist may rarely result in a KSI, but it doesn’t imply which party was at fault for it (and similarly collisions between cars and pedestrians may be the fault of either party).
The data set has the issues
The data set has the issues as you say, plus that particular graph of course is just raw numbers, not corrected for number of a given mode. Nor frequency of encounter – now that would be really interesting! Of course we’re unlikely to be able to find that without getting our big-data-gathering corporate overlords to cooperate in using their rather sinister powers for the public good.
I find these charts lead to more questions. Like “why do LGVs and vans come out as the worst?” “Where and when are these collisions happening (road type, traffic speed / volume)?” “Given we know x, what can we do about it which doesn’t break something else? (like requiring all pedestrians to cross roads by burrowing underneath them)”. And “which poor cyclist ‘killed’ a driver?” (as you say, they likely didn’t – or at least didn’t do so and cycle off laughing – it’s in the data “coding”).
I guess that is a good thing!
chrisonatrike wrote:
LGV and van drivers often suffer from poor visibility of other traffic and their extra weight means that collisions are going to involve more energy and thus be more likely to result in deaths. There may be other effects at play as well, such as the demographics (young people are more likely to be involved in collisions which is why motor insurance is so expensive for them), but that’d involve a lot more analysis and probably a bit of guess work.
I suspect that the motorists that died in a collision with a pedestrian most likely hit something else as well, like a wall or a building.
Whose “common sense” are you
Whose “common sense” are you using as your standard? The driver who thinks it’s “common sense” that cyclists should immediately pull over when a motorised vehicle is behind them? The cyclist who thinks it’s “common sense” that they can ride through a zebra front of pedestrians because they’ve seen a gap? The driver who thinks it’s “common sense” that they should be allowed to exceed the speed limit if the road is clear and it’s a nice sunny day? As Voltaire noted, common sense is actually quite rare and, as we can all note, everyone has their own definition of it. That’s why we have road laws rather than relying on common sense.
More “common sense”
More “common sense”
This maybe new to cyclists, but there are such things a cycle lanes, that is where cyclists are meant to be at all times, not ride infront of cars confront drivers that happen to have their phone in their hand.
Yes, but the same rules applies to cyclists as it does to motorists. Cyclists do not own the road.
So cyclists can use the motorways then like motorists?
I didn’t say that they could.
[sound of cognitive dissonance]
Please stop with the
Please stop with the hystrionics. This is a total non-event. Or at least it should be. Have you never been stopped in your car whilst obeying the law?
As for Mikey’s points, sure, speed limits don’t apply but that point about transfer of momentum is a total red herring. Whilst true, it doesn’t mean a cyclist can’t kill a pedestrian and the momentum transferred at 40mph is significantly greater than that at 30mph or indeed 20mph. Isn’t that the argument you guys use to justify lower speed limits for cars? Why doesn’t it apply to the safety of cycling?
And I loved his acceptance of cyclists breaking the pavement cycling law only to justify it by laying the blame on motorists. ? If you break the law, you break the law. It’s nobody else’s fault. And there are seldom mitigating factors. That’s also the argument Mikey uses all the time to justify his actions against motorists. Why doesn’t it fully apply to cyclists, Mikey?
By making so much of a meal out of nothing and turning the focus and blame back on to motorists, you are all furthering the divide between the cyclist and non-cyclist factions.
Please, all it takes is a little grace and a bit of acceptance that some cyclists get it wrong. Maybe some posts about bad cycling by other cyclists might help redress the balance. Remember that motorists also report bad motorists. We report our own bad ‘uns. Why don’t you? After all, we all want the same thing: safer roads and a more harmonious street environment for all users.
To this end, sometimes cyclists like motorists will get stopped by police and given some advice. Get over it. Your are not unique. You are not above the law and you have no more rights than any other road user. (Ok, I know you have, so you are actually already in a more favoured position: don’t abuse it)
And another thing! Mikey and Vine are NOT the type of people you want as cycling advocates. They are self obsessed, zealots and in the case of Mikey, we can add “avenging” to that too. Stop giving them so much air time. They are counter-productive to achieving harmony. They want to win, not collaborate.
You’re missing the point that
You’re missing the point that the police ignore the motorists travelling at a similar if not greater speed and instead have focussed on the cyclists. If the police were effective in stopping motorists from speeding, then it would be acceptable for them to also deal with cyclists, but instead we have the situation where drivers are being allowed to break the law and introduce significant danger to others on the roads and the police decide to tackle some cyclists who are not even breaking any laws and don’t pose nearly the same level of danger.
the police ignore the
the police ignore the motorists travelling at a similar if not greater speed and instead have focussed on the cyclist …the police decide to tackle some cyclists who are not even breaking any laws
Selective and non-enforcement of the law is the police technique which allows them to remain, essentially, the makers of traffic law in the UK. They like to retain that power and will bend and break the rules to do so. I have demonstrated ad nauseam how Lancashire police refuse to take action over red light offence drivers, phone using drivers (one, doped up on nitrous, even turning to show me a picture of naked breasts on a phone held in his right hand while driving), drivers of vehicles without MOT/ insurance/ VED for years on end etc. etc. The weakness in my argument is that I don’t have evidence of them instead taking action against cyclists- I have to rely on evidence from elsewhere in the country for that because there simply aren’t many cyclists around here. However, I do assert they would act in these stupid ways if they ever saw any- I never see police except when hordes of them are parked hiding away from work at Garstang police station.
BigDoodyBoy wrote:
You appear to be undermining your own promising “let’s not be tribal” argument there.
The notion that somehow “harmony”, “sharing the road” and “we’re all just trying to get from A to B” is some kind of overlooked ingredient which will make the roads “safer” or “better” (normally by the minority / more vulnerable group “giving some more respect”) is a lovely idea! Unfortunately unrelated to the reality of human psychology, our modes of transport or of street design.
Why do you think is hasn’t happened already? (There have been several campaigns).
Why do you think a tiny minority (the majority of whom also drive) somehow have the power to make it better (or are making it worse) for all?
I’m pleased to hear you’re also interested in improving our roads and public spaces, and the safety of these – me too. You didn’t ask but I might recommend some reading / viewing on why different transport modes don’t and won’t “just get along” (unless there are very few of each) and how we might still make places safer, more efficient and more pleasant for all:
The best country in the world for drivers.
What encourages cycling – same as driving! A network of good quality routes, the feeling of safety and social travel.
A safe road ethos to efficiently and safely move people, not just motor vehicles.
A nice “it’s people” article (New York)
BigDoodyBoy wrote:
Hadn’t started. IMHO they were a bit speedy there.
You seem to be proving Mikey’s point about “people will use this as ammo” though!
Ah – glad we’re on the same page! Not only have I not been stopped in a car whilst obeying the law, I’ve never been stopped in a car whilst not obeying the law *. Perhaps that’s why there isn’t “harmony” on the streets? I’d say most people are more or less “honest”. However you still need to keep honest people honest. Not only does everyone give themselves a pass from time to time but where there are rarely consequences people sensibly don’t see the point in rules.
Again – great minds and all. I see you’ve picked up on the fact that when road offenses appear in court, the CPS aren’t afraid of applying the maximum relevant charge (“dangerous driving” rather than “careless”), juries don’t have sympathy for those whose defense was that they weren’t competent to drive so should get a pass (“I didn’t see… the sun was in my eyes…”) and magistrates and judges aren’t convinced by pleas of “exceptional hardship” and “genuine remorse” (where the accused has a ton of previous).
Oh… sorry, I had that backwards! I’m sure the goverment’s urgent review of road law (announce 2014) will sort that out.
* In the UK – I’ve definitely exceeded the speed limit and I’ve certainly I’ve managed to go through a traffic light on red due to confusion about lights. Bound to have parked illegally too. Now, I’m a very infrequent driver. However I have been stopped by the police in a car several times … in the US. (I was a passenger every time, but they seem to take road policing a bit more seriously there. Remarkable when there’s so much road…)
BigDoodyBoy wrote:
Literally never. Nor on a motorcycle. None of my family ever have been. None of my friends ever have been. Nobody I’ve ever known ever has been. When 54% of motorists ignore 30 mph limits and 86% of motorists ignore 20 mph limits, one rather doubts that the police have a lot of time to pull over people who are actually obeying the law and if they did why would they be doing that instead of catching those who are breaking the law?