snowy

All of which are speed limited and require actual ID linked to an individual to hire - unlike a car - which is registered to an owner not the operator. Simple answer to the library junction is to add a green light bike filter - a cyclists only crossing phase.

You're funny! I would say that you post like a teenager, but that's disrespectful to teenagers You get caught posting a video without watching it properly first. That video has your hero character calling someone a scumbag and hoping that they get hit by a bus. Serious personal injury was not the argument that you were really trying to make but you have an inability not to always last word every conversation you have. No one here is not calling out poor road behaviour. That's all in your imagination. And your examples don't qualify your actions. Driving to the speed limit? Certainly proving the adage that not all heroes wear capes. Anyway, to the point you were trying to make when not sulking - it's policed less than you want because the govt and the police don't think its a priority because its proven severity and impact are of lower consequence than risk and harm caused by other road users. Its policed proportionally. Which means that you are down to a sort of Schrodinger's cyclist argument - allegedly their numbers are down, so provision for infrastructure should be reduced, but offenses by cyclists are up and therefore should be policed. Given that a fixed penalty notice is what a cyclist would be fined , why aren't the police / southwark seeing them as a great cash cow?

Such projection

Don't try to change the subject. You watched that video in which he says that he "hopes [someone] gets hit by a bus" and thought, 'i know thats just what i want to post on the EDF'. Right?

I wonder whether Rocks agrees with his opening comment of "scumbag, i hope you get hit by a bus" towards a cyclist?

Now this is an Alan Partridge / pedestrianisation of Norwich City Centre argument we can all get behind. Extrapolating it, all cul de sacs are discriminatory, no through road council estates are the work of the devil and De Beauvoir Town is high up in Dante's circles.

[Nadine Dorries has entered the chat]

Good to see the current Work and Pensions secretary is clearly an EDF reader - today they're suggesting the over fifties might like to work as Deliveroo riders.

Its not though is it - its the basis for traffic management applied globally. Also, I'm Spartacus

Word of the day from Susie Dent today is: snollygoster 'one who abandons their principles for shirt term gain or power.

So police officers have powers but CEOs don't. This was the guidance issued for FPNs for pavement cycling by the home office: "The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief Police Officers who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required". And is that the right act you have quoted: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/schedule/3

But what actual legal powers under the Traffic Management Act do they have in relation to bicycles/pedestrians/horse riders?

Please tell us how many (out of ten) cars are currently compliant?

Minister For Transport Grant Shapps!

Who said this quiz: “There is clear evidence that for all the controversy they can sometimes cause, ambitious cycling and walking schemes have significant, if quieter, majority support.”

I would be a bit annoyed if i lived in one of the 4 tory boroughs that just wasted £1m of local constituents council tax on a bit of culture war electioneering against a Conservative policy.

I mean, lol. "Delivering a summary of his 18-page ruling, Mr Justice Swift said all three grounds of claim brought by the councils had failed. “I’m satisfied the Mayor’s decision to expand the Ulez area by amending the present road charging scheme rather than submitting an entirely new scheme was within his powers,” he said. “Having carefully considered the decision published for the purposes of consultation, I’m satisfied sufficient information was provided to permit those wanting to respond to the consultation to provide informed responses. “I’m further satisfied that when taking the decision on the grant to meet the cost of the vehicle scrappage scheme, the Mayor understood the likely provision that would be made. “While the consultation conducted was not in-depth, it was lawful.” the actual quote in context.

Those words don't exist in the judgement

Where does it say that in their summary? Point 37 dismisses all of the claims that the consultation was insufficient.

"I suppose what would be refreshing if one, just one, of the driving lobby who post here could agree there is a problem in the Dulwich area right now with bad driving - but no, it never happens and never will happen, because like so many things about the pro-passive travel groups they are more than happy to turn a blind eye to their own group's indiscretions and dismiss it."

Isn't zip intended for shorter local/regional use? You would obviously get a cheaper holiday term hire price from enterprise or hertz (other hire companies are available).

Here's barbyonabike's video collection of poor local driving: https://youtube.com/@barbyonabike Video from yesterday:

Shameless

This isn't true. TfL don't manage Waterloo Bridge. Its owned by the city of Westminster who moved the barriers as it was pointed out that having Hostile Vehicle Mitigation barriers implemented whilst also having a bus lane that terrorists using said Hostile Vehicles could still access wasn't meeting the risk assessment. So blaming it on cyclists is also not correct.