Earl Aelfheah

I suspect that after 8 years, it has probably faded by now.

Ha! I never knew that, but it's true: https://www.gov.uk/rules-pedestrians-1-to-35/general-guidance-1-to-6 I wonder if any pedestrian has ever gone out with fluorescent armbands at night. henryb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The highway code recommends pedestrians wear > something fluorescent at night. Would anyone stop > and shout at someone if they weren?t doing so? Yes > pedestrians and cyclists should take reasonable > steps to get themselves seen but it really depends > on the context ? if they were cycling a couple of > hundred yards on residential streets then the > additional risk they are putting themselves in > isn?t worth getting upset about. It is actually > refreshing that someone thinks it is safe enough > to cycle late at night. > > The problem with the these complaints about > cyclists isn?t that they are not justified ? it is > that they blatantly ignore why the roads are > dangerous in the first place.

Henryb - you make a good point.

Lady D - I get your point. The costs to others, in terms of the potential consequences of driving a car are not insignificant and there is a huge responsibility therefore, which goes with driving. I think the majority of people recognise this, which is why we have a system of driving tests, licencing and policing. These things don't exist in relation to cyclists which is a recognition that it is a less potentially destructive activity. But that is not to say that there are no responsibilities which come with riding a bike. Having lights on at night is one of them.

So here are my thoughts on this: Every road user should do what they can to reduce the likelihood of an accident occurring and at night, this includes having lights Cycling is not generally a dangerous activity, in fact it will probably increase your life, not shorten it, but like anything it is not risk free. This is not a 'them and us' thing. Most cyclist are also car drivers and vice versa. We all need to look out for each other. That said, I can understand the defensiveness some cyclist display in the face of criticism (and fall foul of it myself sometimes). There is a lot of unjustified vitriol targeted towards cyclists. There is a general narrative in the media of 'irresponsible cyclists' and a really distasteful amount of victim blaming which occurs when cyclists are involved in accidents. In this context it is easy to develop a chip on ones shoulder. Fundamentally none of this changes point 1.

... Yeah, I do agree that to cycle on the roads at night, without lights is stupid beyond belief. I have no argument with that - but do challenge the general idea of cycling as a dangerous activity.

Fair enough SJ, but it is important to challenge that perception. It is also dangerous being a pedestrian walking the streets. Four times as many pedestrians are victims of road fatalities than cyclists and increasing the number of cyclists reduces the risks for everyone (of both traffic accidents and shortened life expectancies as a result of air pollution).

Cycling is not a high risk activity, even in London. In fact research suggests that the benefits to health significantly out weigh the risks of accidents or injury: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2920084/

I knew you were going to ask that

Mark my words... 8 years from now, this will all be mainstream and the Picture Gallery will commissioning 'street art' festivals.

I think it's fair enough to vent on the forum.

Brixton is spiritually SE in my mind. SW starts at Clapham and just grows in obnoxiousness all the way out through Surrey.

Reminds me of that Orb record where they phone up Thames Television and ask for Haile Selassie.

I heard that it's going to be a pirate supplies shop.

.

Peck-ham, eggs, sausages, beans, two grilled tomatoes and a potato waffle. Too long?

PeckHampstead?

Very good :-) maxxi Wrote: > Peckham Wry?

Peckhamshire?

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is as silly as grown men playing with a > ball and getting all tribal over it. Good description

'The way M&S have treated them'. I thought this was the lease holder's application?

cle Wrote: > SE has never been better - it's just that SE5 and > SE15 are now far more interesting, varied, > creative and better connected than SE22. That's always been true, although 'interesting and varied' become less of a priority when you get a bit older and have kids, as they tend to come with a certain amount of chaos and unpredictability that children already provide plenty of.

Looks like there is going to be a loss of two morning trains (7:31 and 8:15) post 1st September too: http://www.southernrailway.com/download/31749.9/27-june-september/

Thanks for the heads up TB2.