Another cyclist dies in London
Discussion
InitialDave said:
To be fair, that sign would be specifically for the cyclepath, to indicate that the closure renders it out of use, and thus the route provided around the roadworks is only a footpath, so you should dismount and walk.
You would also be able to use the road, riding your bike, that's a separate thing.
But when a cycle lane is there, I assume it has been put there due to heavy traffic on that section, especially HGV vehicles.You would also be able to use the road, riding your bike, that's a separate thing.
When that is closed and a sign tells you to walk, why would you NOT want to do what the sign suggests?
There is surely a chance you may get crushed and someone did.
Regardless of fault and the fact there's nothing stopping you using the road as a rider, why would you not get off and walk? Not enough time?
Genuine question.
Digby said:
I see the same thing happening with pedestrians and coned off sections of pavements etc. They will happily circumvent cones and barriers and risk some concrete beams crushing them to death from above, rather than cross over as the sign suggests.
Why?
What sign? What does the sign say that these pedestrians are ignoring?Why?
ZX10R NIN said:
Digby said:
Governments scared of pollution figures due to telling us all to buy a diesel?
Look it's been proved that diesels are not the only reason for the air quality in London, the number of traffic lights speed humps (in the very place that could really have an effect on your air quality) the lowering of speed limits the number of apartments being built with no increase in infrastructure to support the extra people the cut throughs being closed off & last but far from least the reduction in carriageway space by 1/3 to private vehicles since the Mayoral system came into place.Remove that lot & lets see how the air quality I've said it on other threads get on your politicians/councilors case before blaming the motorist who's at the end of these vote chasing policies & get them to think long term which might get us a proper effective roads policy for all rather than letting them get off scot free by infighting amongst ourselves.
bobmoore said:
Those signs are advisory, anyone who ignores them is doing nothing wrong. They cause loads of confusion and are not approved by TFL any more:
https://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/dictionary/cycl...
That is a different type of sign, used in a different situation to that in the photo. https://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/dictionary/cycl...
If you refer to page 35 of this document: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
You will see that it is a sign used when the closure due to the roadworks is one that means only a footpath is currently present, and so to cycle on it is not permitted - it is not currently a cycle path.
So the sign is "advisory" in the sense that it is advising cyclists that the roadworks mean the cyclepath is not currently available, and they should treat the route provided as a footpath only - i.e. walk, do not cycle.
bobmoore said:
The reason is that sometimes people see those signs and think "Anyone who uses the road can be killed with immunity". There really are people that stupid.
Only a person suffering from some form of mental illness would think that.Digby said:
But when a cycle lane is there, I assume it has been put there due to heavy traffic on that section, especially HGV vehicles.
Yes, I agree, but this is just a slightly different flavour of the "why use the road if a cyclepath is provided?" one, and in this specific example, I was pointing out that, while the sign is there, it is relevant to the cyclepath/footpath area, and has no bearing on whether riding on the road is or isn't legal or sensible.DoubleD said:
I havent got a licence for one but i still like to go out in it for a bit of fun.
Like this bloke:http://road.cc/content/news/177705-tipper-truck-dr...
InitialDave said:
Only a person suffering from some form of mental illness would think that.
No, plenty of people say exactly that, as I said upthread, it's amazingly common, London cabbies have boasted that any cyclist who shuns the CSH is "fair game" and if any rider is hurt using the road when a cycle lane is available is the agent of their own injuries no matter what the circumstances. It's an amazingly common refrain.bobmoore said:
No, plenty of people say exactly that, as I said upthread, it's amazingly common, London cabbies have boasted that any cyclist who shuns the CSH is "fair game" and if any rider is hurt using the road when a cycle lane is available is the agent of their own injuries no matter what the circumstances. It's an amazingly common refrain.
I'm sure they do. I think they are mentally ill.bobmoore said:
Please don't use that as an insult. They're not mentally ill at all, they have a deep-seated enmity, not the same thing.
I'm not using it as an insult. I think they have something wrong with them that prevents them properly empathising with other people or considering the ramifications of their actions.Edit: Also, that's classic tone policing, and you can f
k off with that bullst.Edited by InitialDave on Tuesday 14th February 18:14
InitialDave said:
bobmoore said:
Please don't use that as an insult. They're not mentally ill at all, they have a deep-seated enmity, not the same thing.
I'm not using it as an insult. I think they have something wrong with them that prevents them properly empathising with other people or considering the ramifications of their actions.Edit: Also, that's classic tone policing, and you can f
k off with that bullst.Edited by InitialDave on Tuesday 14th February 18:14
The thread which just keeps on giving 
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff