Another cyclist dies in London
Discussion
heebeegeetee said:
The Dangerous Elk said:
What you have used is a limited police action and are extrapalating results from that to try and firm up your assatation that cyclists do not in significant numbers infringe regulations at traffic lights.
I think you have me mixed up with someone else, to the best of my knowledge I have never said that and don't think that. Ares said:
There are a significant number of cyclists that infringe regulations at traffic lights, just as there are with every class of road user and pedestrian.
When it comes to police attention, they have to spend time on the issues that cause the most problems/KSI stats etc. Pedestrians and Cyclists, regardless of numbers, and regardless how wrong it is (which it is) cause annoyance and frustration, but they don't really cause accidents/injuries thus police time is better spent on issue that do (or will raise revenue
)
The Anti-Social impact of such activities by cyclists are significant and cannot/should not be ignored. When it comes to police attention, they have to spend time on the issues that cause the most problems/KSI stats etc. Pedestrians and Cyclists, regardless of numbers, and regardless how wrong it is (which it is) cause annoyance and frustration, but they don't really cause accidents/injuries thus police time is better spent on issue that do (or will raise revenue
)NHS figures hint (as there are not good figures) at an increase in Ped/Cyclist collisions.
As for Police deployment, traffic officers are deployed and cameras monitor drivers with various levels of effect (how much is debatable), foot patrols could and should be deployed/instructed to control the Anti-Social behaviour (in particular RL jumping and Pedestrian crossings) of cyclists. If they were everybody is policed and the problem (which is obvious in London) is reduced.
As it stands there is an increasing dissatisfaction with the level of effective control of such behaviour and the (at times) ridiculous levels of denial by the more prominent Pro-Cycling pressure groups.
There is a reason why cyclists always feel attacked (as drivers do) and that is the actions of a significant number of them and their actions. It stems from other people constantly observing their actions, this grows the assumptions that a large number of cyclist, drivers and pedestrians have of each other, "Yobbo Boy Racers", "Lycra Warriors" "Peds are Phone Zombies" and such.
cb1965 said:
Ares said:
Digby said:
And if you want to see the perfect example of what you often have to deal with..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leW8Mx1GciE
How do you stop this?
This happens to me often despite "WARNING. THIS VEHICLE IS TURNING LEFT" being emitted from a speaker on that same side.
On numerous occasions, I have been be mid-turn and riders such as those in the previous clip will dart in to the road I am turning in to, skip across the front of my vehicle and return back to the road going straight on. Anything to avoid having to slow progress.
Struggling to see the issue with that one? HGV saw the cyclists in the cycle lane, waited, then set off. Guy with camera (behind truck for what ever reason) turning with the truck - said 'Jesus Christ' but not sure who at?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leW8Mx1GciE
How do you stop this?
This happens to me often despite "WARNING. THIS VEHICLE IS TURNING LEFT" being emitted from a speaker on that same side.
On numerous occasions, I have been be mid-turn and riders such as those in the previous clip will dart in to the road I am turning in to, skip across the front of my vehicle and return back to the road going straight on. Anything to avoid having to slow progress.
(And the other riders just went to their designated space in front of the truck (which the truck was partly in, but thats truck drivers...
). But the truck saw them and gave way as they have priority being in the cycle box ahead of traffic.)You not being able to see what is right there is a bugger issue
The Dangerous Elk said:
Ares said:
There are a significant number of cyclists that infringe regulations at traffic lights, just as there are with every class of road user and pedestrian.
When it comes to police attention, they have to spend time on the issues that cause the most problems/KSI stats etc. Pedestrians and Cyclists, regardless of numbers, and regardless how wrong it is (which it is) cause annoyance and frustration, but they don't really cause accidents/injuries thus police time is better spent on issue that do (or will raise revenue )
The Anti-Social impact of such activities by cyclists are significant and cannot/should not be ignored. When it comes to police attention, they have to spend time on the issues that cause the most problems/KSI stats etc. Pedestrians and Cyclists, regardless of numbers, and regardless how wrong it is (which it is) cause annoyance and frustration, but they don't really cause accidents/injuries thus police time is better spent on issue that do (or will raise revenue
)NHS figures hint (as there are not good figures) at an increase in Ped/Cyclist collisions.
As for Police deployment, traffic officers are deployed and cameras monitor drivers with various levels of effect (how much is debatable), foot patrols could and should be deployed/instructed to control the Anti-Social behaviour (in particular RL jumping and Pedestrian crossings) of cyclists. If they were everybody is policed and the problem (which is obvious in London) is reduced.
As it stands there is an increasing dissatisfaction with the level of effective control of such behaviour and the (at times) ridiculous levels of denial by the more prominent Pro-Cycling pressure groups.
There is a reason why cyclists always feel attacked (as drivers do) and that is the actions of a significant number of them and their actions. It stems from other people constantly observing their actions, this grows the assumptions that a large number of cyclist, drivers and pedestrians have of each other, "Yobbo Boy Racers", "Lycra Warriors" "Peds are Phone Zombies" and such.
Police aren't there to police very very minor anti-social infringements (ASBO generating anti-social behaviour would be different.) If the police were to get involved when every group of road users got a little bit upset due to another actions they would never do anything else even with 10x the headcount. Just as with swearing on the street, or picking on Gingers.
I'll ask a question, that you'll ignore as usual no doubt, but where are the "ridiculous levels of denial by the more prominent Pro-Cycling pressure groups."? And that Prominent Pro-Cycling Pressure Groups?
And the final massively over-stated failure in your post... it isn't a 'significant' number of cyclists, just as there aren't a significant number of motorist that cause issues, just as there aren't a significant number of motorist that cause issues. In all cases, it is a tiny minority.
Ares said:
Anti-Social Impact?? Really?? Yes, I will use the example of controlled pedestrian crossing as an example
Police aren't there to police very very minor anti-social infringements (ASBO generating anti-social behaviour would be different.) If the police were to get involved when every group of road users got a little bit upset due to another actions they would never do anything else even with 10x the headcount. Just as with swearing on the street, or picking on Gingers.
Why try to deflect with talk of Gingers ? There is good reason to call such activities Anti-Social. I would think Scooter riders are getting a bit pissed of with the "significant numbers" of them carrying out the Anti-Social" activities they are becoming known for.
I'll ask a question, that you'll ignore as usual no doubt, but where are the "ridiculous levels of denial by the more prominent Pro-Cycling pressure groups."? And that Prominent Pro-Cycling Pressure Groups? All over their websites, endless reasons used to ignor/excuse poor behavour
And the final massively over-stated failure in your post... it isn't a 'significant' number of cyclists, just as there aren't a significant number of motorist that cause issues, just as there aren't a significant number of motorist that cause issues. In all cases, it is a tiny minority.
Define significant, by MY definition it is a number that has an effect
Police aren't there to police very very minor anti-social infringements (ASBO generating anti-social behaviour would be different.) If the police were to get involved when every group of road users got a little bit upset due to another actions they would never do anything else even with 10x the headcount. Just as with swearing on the street, or picking on Gingers.
Why try to deflect with talk of Gingers ? There is good reason to call such activities Anti-Social. I would think Scooter riders are getting a bit pissed of with the "significant numbers" of them carrying out the Anti-Social" activities they are becoming known for.
I'll ask a question, that you'll ignore as usual no doubt, but where are the "ridiculous levels of denial by the more prominent Pro-Cycling pressure groups."? And that Prominent Pro-Cycling Pressure Groups? All over their websites, endless reasons used to ignor/excuse poor behavour
And the final massively over-stated failure in your post... it isn't a 'significant' number of cyclists, just as there aren't a significant number of motorist that cause issues, just as there aren't a significant number of motorist that cause issues. In all cases, it is a tiny minority.
Define significant, by MY definition it is a number that has an effect
Edited by The Dangerous Elk on Tuesday 21st November 12:47
cb1965 said:
Ares said:
cb1965 said:
Ares said:
Digby said:
And if you want to see the perfect example of what you often have to deal with..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leW8Mx1GciE
How do you stop this?
This happens to me often despite "WARNING. THIS VEHICLE IS TURNING LEFT" being emitted from a speaker on that same side.
On numerous occasions, I have been be mid-turn and riders such as those in the previous clip will dart in to the road I am turning in to, skip across the front of my vehicle and return back to the road going straight on. Anything to avoid having to slow progress.
Struggling to see the issue with that one? HGV saw the cyclists in the cycle lane, waited, then set off. Guy with camera (behind truck for what ever reason) turning with the truck - said 'Jesus Christ' but not sure who at?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leW8Mx1GciE
How do you stop this?
This happens to me often despite "WARNING. THIS VEHICLE IS TURNING LEFT" being emitted from a speaker on that same side.
On numerous occasions, I have been be mid-turn and riders such as those in the previous clip will dart in to the road I am turning in to, skip across the front of my vehicle and return back to the road going straight on. Anything to avoid having to slow progress.
Ares said:
(And the other riders just went to their designated space in front of the truck
At least two were behind the cab, one stopped and the other riding up as the truck set off.... surely you can see that isn't the cleverest thing to do????Ares said:
You not being able to see what is right there is a bugger issue
You not being able to see what is wrong is a very good indicator of why some of you die! FFS!!!!!!!
Ares said:
Digby said:
And if you want to see the perfect example of what you often have to deal with..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leW8Mx1GciE
How do you stop this?
This happens to me often despite "WARNING. THIS VEHICLE IS TURNING LEFT" being emitted from a speaker on that same side.
On numerous occasions, I have been be mid-turn and riders such as those in the previous clip will dart in to the road I am turning in to, skip across the front of my vehicle and return back to the road going straight on. Anything to avoid having to slow progress.
Struggling to see the issue with that one? HGV saw the cyclists in the cycle lane, waited, then set off. Guy with camera (behind truck for what ever reason) turning with the truck - said 'Jesus Christ' but not sure who at?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leW8Mx1GciE
How do you stop this?
This happens to me often despite "WARNING. THIS VEHICLE IS TURNING LEFT" being emitted from a speaker on that same side.
On numerous occasions, I have been be mid-turn and riders such as those in the previous clip will dart in to the road I am turning in to, skip across the front of my vehicle and return back to the road going straight on. Anything to avoid having to slow progress.
They did not know that the lights wouldn't change whilst they were passing that truck OR that the driver would see them.
Ares said:
And that Prominent Pro-Cycling Pressure Groups?
I think i've understood your slightly emotional keypad mashing above. 
https://www.camcycle.org.uk/planning/
These are a typical pressure group. Look at their "design guide". It essentially gives cycles priority everywhere, over peds, cars, over everything. Everybody I work with - including some very pro-cycle (and pro-EV, pro-walking, anti-car) people - can see major safety flaws in the plan, and that a few cyclists may be happier but it is an accident waiting to happen with regard to bus stops, driveways, side roads etc. There is a good reason why we aren't creating swathes of cycle lanes in accordance with that guide.
Dedicated facilities will remove an awful lot of on-road parking - as idealistic as it is to say "everyone sell your cars", it won't happen. So cars WILL end up parking in cycle lanes (just like cycles WILL end up riding in ped-only areas, seeing as cyclists on here like a little what-aboutism) and the 2 wheeled lot will STILL get pissy knickers.
This thinking is starting to infect other cities and towns, with far fewer than the 20% cycle traffic that Cambridge has. Thankfully the lower traffic levels, and sensible Cllrs mean the plans are quashed quickly, but the rot has certainly set in, in Cambridge.
cb1965 said:
WinstonWolf said:
I hate to agree with you (and I promise I won't repeat it) but those going up the inside were idiots. Zero hazard perception and no easy escape route if the lights change
Look, I know we have our differences, but glad it's not just me. I don't cycle much these days, but I would never do what some of these people do just out of a sense of self preservation and I seriously can't work out why they cannot see the danger.
To keep the bunfight going, I'd have just nipped up the path and hooked a cheeky left if I was on the bike
WinstonWolf said:
I cycle (and drive) regularly, there's no way I'd put myself in that position. I won't even position myself near the tipping point of an HGV on a roundabout in the car
To keep the bunfight going, I'd have just nipped up the path and hooked a cheeky left if I was on the bike
If there's nobody on the path, is it even an issue? Just like running a red is OK if there's nobody around to see it/be affected by it. Maybe. To keep the bunfight going, I'd have just nipped up the path and hooked a cheeky left if I was on the bike
The Dangerous Elk said:
Ares said:
Anti-Social Impact?? Really?? Yes, I will use the example of controlled pedestrian crossing as an example
Police aren't there to police very very minor anti-social infringements (ASBO generating anti-social behaviour would be different.) If the police were to get involved when every group of road users got a little bit upset due to another actions they would never do anything else even with 10x the headcount. Just as with swearing on the street, or picking on Gingers.
Why try to deflect with talk of Gingers ? There is good reason to call such activities Anti-Social. I would think Scooter riders are getting a bit pissed of with the "significant numbers" of them carrying out the Anti-Social" activities they are becoming known for.
I'll ask a question, that you'll ignore as usual no doubt, but where are the "ridiculous levels of denial by the more prominent Pro-Cycling pressure groups."? And that Prominent Pro-Cycling Pressure Groups? All over their websites, endless reasons used to ignor/excuse poor behavour
And the final massively over-stated failure in your post... it isn't a 'significant' number of cyclists, just as there aren't a significant number of motorist that cause issues, just as there aren't a significant number of motorist that cause issues. In all cases, it is a tiny minority.
Define significant, by MY definition it is a number that has an effect
Police aren't there to police very very minor anti-social infringements (ASBO generating anti-social behaviour would be different.) If the police were to get involved when every group of road users got a little bit upset due to another actions they would never do anything else even with 10x the headcount. Just as with swearing on the street, or picking on Gingers.
Why try to deflect with talk of Gingers ? There is good reason to call such activities Anti-Social. I would think Scooter riders are getting a bit pissed of with the "significant numbers" of them carrying out the Anti-Social" activities they are becoming known for.
I'll ask a question, that you'll ignore as usual no doubt, but where are the "ridiculous levels of denial by the more prominent Pro-Cycling pressure groups."? And that Prominent Pro-Cycling Pressure Groups? All over their websites, endless reasons used to ignor/excuse poor behavour
And the final massively over-stated failure in your post... it isn't a 'significant' number of cyclists, just as there aren't a significant number of motorist that cause issues, just as there aren't a significant number of motorist that cause issues. In all cases, it is a tiny minority.
Define significant, by MY definition it is a number that has an effect
Edited by The Dangerous Elk on Tuesday 21st November 12:47
OK - the Ginger reference was a farcical statement to respond to your farcical statement. How about commenting on the issue. Is a rider going through a red light as damaging a social impact as a scooter robbery?
"Their websites". Show me a few.......? Who are 'they'? I'm not even sure what a Pro-Cycling Pressure Group is or who they are let alone all this 'ridiculous level of denial'.
And so 1 out of 2 million would be a significant number?
cb1965 said:
Ares said:
cb1965 said:
Ares said:
Digby said:
And if you want to see the perfect example of what you often have to deal with..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leW8Mx1GciE
How do you stop this?
This happens to me often despite "WARNING. THIS VEHICLE IS TURNING LEFT" being emitted from a speaker on that same side.
On numerous occasions, I have been be mid-turn and riders such as those in the previous clip will dart in to the road I am turning in to, skip across the front of my vehicle and return back to the road going straight on. Anything to avoid having to slow progress.
Struggling to see the issue with that one? HGV saw the cyclists in the cycle lane, waited, then set off. Guy with camera (behind truck for what ever reason) turning with the truck - said 'Jesus Christ' but not sure who at?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leW8Mx1GciE
How do you stop this?
This happens to me often despite "WARNING. THIS VEHICLE IS TURNING LEFT" being emitted from a speaker on that same side.
On numerous occasions, I have been be mid-turn and riders such as those in the previous clip will dart in to the road I am turning in to, skip across the front of my vehicle and return back to the road going straight on. Anything to avoid having to slow progress.
Ares said:
(And the other riders just went to their designated space in front of the truck
At least two were behind the cab, one stopped and the other riding up as the truck set off.... surely you can see that isn't the cleverest thing to do????Ares said:
You not being able to see what is right there is a bugger issue
You not being able to see what is wrong is a very good indicator of why some of you die! FFS!!!!!!!You mean the riders of cyclists sitting in the cycle box, and setting off without causing any issues? "You Buffoon"?
Now you've described what you got all hot under the collar about, yes, Not the smartest. But in fairness, they were where they should be. The truck wasn't. Luckily, the truck driver wasn't you, didn't have a grudge against cyclists, did use his eyes/mirrors, perhaps recognised he was where he shouldn't have been, and the world was a happy place with no harm done.
Seems a bit of a non-issue to me? If you are suggesting that other road users should detrimentally change their behaviour because someone does something wrong, you would appear to be a stone-thrower in a glass house
cb1965 said:
WinstonWolf said:
I cycle (and drive) regularly, there's no way I'd put myself in that position. I won't even position myself near the tipping point of an HGV on a roundabout in the car
Crikey we actually have common ground as your comment about the HGV/car is exactly the point I made months ago and exactly how I drive.I suspect a lot of us here cycle as we drive, hence the 'all cyclists' thing grates a bit.
If something's a bit illegal but not unsafe, meh. If something's legal but stupid I won't do it...
WinstonWolf said:
Steady on!!!
I suspect a lot of us here cycle as we drive, hence the 'all cyclists' thing grates a bit.
If something's a bit illegal but not unsafe, meh. If something's legal but stupid I won't do it...
Which I suspect is the same for 99% of cyclists.I suspect a lot of us here cycle as we drive, hence the 'all cyclists' thing grates a bit.
If something's a bit illegal but not unsafe, meh. If something's legal but stupid I won't do it...
.....and 99% of drivers.
cb1965 said:
Ares said:
Why some of us die?? Cancer sufferer? Driver? Cyclist? Parent? Business Owner?
You mean the riders of cyclists sitting in the cycle box, and setting off without causing any issues? "You Buffoon"?
Now you've described what you got all hot under the collar about, yes, Not the smartest. But in fairness, they were where they should be. The truck wasn't. Luckily, the truck driver wasn't you, didn't have a grudge against cyclists, did use his eyes/mirrors, perhaps recognised he was where he shouldn't have been, and the world was a happy place with no harm done.
Seems a bit of a non-issue to me? If you are suggesting that other road users should detrimentally change their behaviour because someone does something wrong, you would appear to be a stone-thrower in a glass house
I have explained very well what I mean and you are now just blustering. Try saying you got it wrong and moving on! Oh and maybe learning!You mean the riders of cyclists sitting in the cycle box, and setting off without causing any issues? "You Buffoon"?
Now you've described what you got all hot under the collar about, yes, Not the smartest. But in fairness, they were where they should be. The truck wasn't. Luckily, the truck driver wasn't you, didn't have a grudge against cyclists, did use his eyes/mirrors, perhaps recognised he was where he shouldn't have been, and the world was a happy place with no harm done.
Seems a bit of a non-issue to me? If you are suggesting that other road users should detrimentally change their behaviour because someone does something wrong, you would appear to be a stone-thrower in a glass house
As for where should they be? Not next to the 44 tons of metal that might result in their death if the driver doesn't see them!!!! That's pure common sense! Nothing more, nothing less!
As soon as it was pointed, I said the cyclists actions were not the smartest.
And not, being where they should be, in the protected cyclist box, unlike the wagon who shouldn't have been in the protected box. Doesn't diminish the fact that it wasn't the smartest move by the riders. They were in the wrong, despite being 'right'.
Do you think the wagon driver was in the wrong at all?
Ares said:
It's not about getting it wrong, it's about not seeing the point being weakly made.
As soon as it was pointed, I said the cyclists actions were not the smartest.
And not, being where they should be, in the protected cyclist box, unlike the wagon who shouldn't have been in the protected box. Doesn't diminish the fact that it wasn't the smartest move by the riders. They were in the wrong, despite being 'right'.
Do you think the wagon driver was in the wrong at all?
Without scoring points over who should have been where, the overall point that is apparently being missed, is that the video clearly show the kind of circumstances that can lead to cyclists being killed under the wheels of left turning hgvs.As soon as it was pointed, I said the cyclists actions were not the smartest.
And not, being where they should be, in the protected cyclist box, unlike the wagon who shouldn't have been in the protected box. Doesn't diminish the fact that it wasn't the smartest move by the riders. They were in the wrong, despite being 'right'.
Do you think the wagon driver was in the wrong at all?
Whislt the hgv driver in this instance was aware of the cyclists down his side (and probably in the blind spots) the next driver may not be so dilligent.
The cyclists who blithely put themselves unnecessarily in such blindspot are the next potential victims.
Mandat said:
Ares said:
It's not about getting it wrong, it's about not seeing the point being weakly made.
As soon as it was pointed, I said the cyclists actions were not the smartest.
And not, being where they should be, in the protected cyclist box, unlike the wagon who shouldn't have been in the protected box. Doesn't diminish the fact that it wasn't the smartest move by the riders. They were in the wrong, despite being 'right'.
Do you think the wagon driver was in the wrong at all?
Without scoring points over who should have been where, the overall point that is apparently being missed, is that the video clearly show the kind of circumstances that can lead to cyclists being killed under the wheels of left turning hgvs.As soon as it was pointed, I said the cyclists actions were not the smartest.
And not, being where they should be, in the protected cyclist box, unlike the wagon who shouldn't have been in the protected box. Doesn't diminish the fact that it wasn't the smartest move by the riders. They were in the wrong, despite being 'right'.
Do you think the wagon driver was in the wrong at all?
Whislt the hgv driver in this instance was aware of the cyclists down his side (and probably in the blind spots) the next driver may not be so dilligent.
The cyclists who blithely put themselves unnecessarily in such blindspot are the next potential victims.
cb1965 said:
Ares said:
Do you think the wagon driver was in the wrong at all?
You see this is the point I seem unable to get across to you and others. It is irrelevant whether the wagon driver is in the wrong when viewed in the context of the danger the cyclists have put themselves in. I would not put myself there the same as I won't run close to an HGV on a roundabout in my car. It's called self preservation and that comes before worrying whether the party that can cause me a lot of damage (or worse) is in the wrong or not. The cyclist filming in the video had his head screwed on. At least two others didn't. The thing is, that the truck driver should not have been in the cycle box isn't up for dispute; we all know he shouldn't be. But Jesus man, what difference does that make in relation to people risking their lives going up his inside?
One other thing that no one seems to think about, tyre blowouts on HGVs can be quite dramatic and they can happen at any time. Good advice is to never place yourself by a tyre, or cycle/drive side by side with a HGV.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpSmRt7kDII
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0pySXLvhnA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpSmRt7kDII
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0pySXLvhnA
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff