Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Horsebox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm pretty much in agreement with DaveR...


In which case I shall respectfully cut and paste what I said to DaveR:


"My suggestion was merely hypothetical, but I am flattered that you have chosen to take it as seriously as you have.:))


Incidentally, do you have any constructive ideas to put forward? I would be very interested in hearing them.



*sits cross-legged facing oak tree, takes a deep breath and...OHHHMMMMMM*

"On the grounds of traceability, the identification of cyclists/bikes, simplification of insurance claims/police reports, the ability to reunite owners with lost/stolen bikes"


If this is for the benefit of bike owners, then it seems excessive to make it compulsory


If this is for a wider 'public good' reason then it needs to be clearly articulated to justify compulsion - presumably with penalties for non-compliance.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Personally, I can't see why cycles should not have

> a registration plate/sticker/whatever that the

> police can use to trace the owner.

>

> Why shouldn't it be this way? Every other vehicle

> on the road has to have one.


Indeed Loz, I have one. But then I also have third party insurance.

kpc Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I would like to nominate LM as our Bicycle Tsar

> (or Tsarina). First thing when I get home, I will

> check my bike's serial number and forward it to LM

> so I can claim the number one spot in the

> database.


*curtseys respectfully*

Really can?t see the point of cyclists having 3rd party insurance. If a cyclist has a crash with a vehicle they usually end up dead with the vehicle having nothing more than a scratch or a broken wing mirror or a nasty stain on the tyre. The damage probably wouldn?t exceed the excess on the policy.

skidmarks Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Really can?t see the point of cyclists having 3rd

> party insurance. If a cyclist has a crash with a

> vehicle they usually end up dead with the vehicle

> having nothing more than a scratch or a broken

> wing mirror or a nasty stain on the tyre. The

> damage probably wouldn?t exceed the excess on the

> policy.


With due respect, there is every point. Many years ago my brakes suddenly failed causing me to crash into the back of a truck. Fortunately there was no damage to the truck, but only because of a large whicker basket attached to the front of my bike which acted as a kind of buffer between the bike/truck. In this situation I would have been liable for any damage to the truck. Also, do bear in mind that insurance is not only about vehicles. There are plenty of accidents involving cyclists/pedestrians and even cyclists/other cyclists.


As for deaths, fortunately these are relatively few compared with non-death accidents. Indeed I myself have been knocked off my bike three times now...I'm still here ;-).

Sensibly sized, well thought out cycle lanes, perhaps separated from particularly busy roads, and penalties for drivers who cross into them. There are some amazingly ill thought lanes on the roads/pavements.


The Guardian's bike blog is particularly keen on writing about it:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/may/20/super-bike-lane


Also like to see the introduction of a 3 point endorsement for any driver stupid enough to quip "Bloody Cyclists not payin road tax".


And finally, more mutual respect between all road users.

Welcome. The second point was tongue in cheek but, well, y'know...no such thing as road tax etc www.ipayroadtax.com (although not sure about those jerseys)...


The bike blog has had some interesting instalments, in particular yesterdays one on female cyclists vulnerability to lorries and last months look at police MTB training - some of the features can be a bit preaching to the converted but well worth a read anyway, IMHO.


(Edited once for iphone URL shenanigans)

Photographic record of ill thought out cycle lanes


http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/facility-of-the-month/


I have seen some of Boris?s Cycle Super Highways going down on Clapham Road. Not exactly ?super? just the usual advisory cycle lanes but in blue. I?ve got a picture somewhere.


As about as ill thought through as his replacement to the bendy bus, replacing it with a bus that has less room and seats downstairs than a typical double decker. I know the bendy bus is not the most well loved vehicle especially for cyclist but given its dues it is the most accessible bus for the disabled, elderly and people with buggies.


Sorry that was off topic.

skidmarks Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Super?

>

> What do you think?



Well, it appears sufficiently wide and it is linked to an Advanced Stop Lane. Good start. But cross the lights and then it stops - abruptly. Then what?


Also, it looks to me as though this particular one also forms part of a Bus Lane? Hmmmm, it would have been nicer/safer had we been given our own lane. And what's with the blue? Very pretty - but we are all used to green. It's better than nothing, but "super"? In my opinion - no. Shame.


Interesting though.

Here is the TfL web page. Look at the first picture in the artists impressions section and then look at the photo I attached again.


http://www.tfl.gov.uk/roadusers/cycling/11901.aspx?lid=switcher


The artist impression shows the lanes being advisory meaning traffic can legally enter the cycle lane. The nearside lane (nearest the kerb) in the photo is now not wide enough for even the smallest vehicle meaning that they sill straddle the cycle lane while using this lane. So much for safe, fast direct routes!


*off to buy shares in blue surfacing company*

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Having a look at the Warrington site... this

> picture made me laugh. Now this is a crap cycle

> lane.

>

> http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/facility

> -of-the-month/porteouverte.jpg



Oh how funny! When you stated that it is a "crap cycle lane", was this because one presumably cycles into the hut for a poo? That is a loo in there?

kpc Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> When I see the words "National Database", that's

> when I reach for my revolver.


Oh well you've nothing to get anxious about then - given that you are in all probability already on the Police National DNA Database...;-)

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> If this is for the benefit of bike owners, then it

> seems excessive to make it compulsory

>

> If this is for a wider 'public good' reason then

> it needs to be clearly articulated to justify

> compulsion - presumably with penalties for

> non-compliance.


Now these sound like excellent proposals for clauses 2 and 3 of the (hypothetical) proposed Bill. Presumably you will be posting a draft for our perusal in due course?;-)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Honestly, the squirrels are not a problem now.  They only eat what has dropped.  The feeders I have are squirrel proof anyway from pre-cage times.  I have never seen rats in the garden, and even when I didn't have the cage.  I most certainly would have noticed them.  I do have a little family of mice which I have zero problem about.  If they stay outside, that's fine with me.  Plus, local cats keep that population down.  There are rats everywhere in London, there is plenty of food rubbish out in the street to keep them happy.  So, I guess you could fit extra bars to the cage if you wanted to, but then you run the risk of the birds not getting in.  They like to be able to fly in and out easily, which they do.   
    • Ahh, the old "it's only three days" chestnut.  I do hope you realise the big metal walls, stages, tents, toilets, lighting, sound equipment, refreshments, concessions etc don't just magically appear & disappear overnight? You know it all has to be transported in & erected, constructed? And that when stuff is constructed, like on a construction site, it's quite noisy & distracting? Banging, crashing, shouting, heavy plant moving around - beep beep beep reversing signals, engines revving - pneumatic tools? For 8 to 10 hours a day, every day? And that it tends to go on for two or three weeks before an event, and a week after when they take it all down again? I'm sure my boys' GCSE prep won't be affected by any of that, especially if we close the windows (before someone suggests that as a resolution). I'm sure it won't affect anyone at the Harris schools either, actually taking their exams with that background noise.
    • Thanks for the good discussion, this should be re-titled as a general thread about feeding the birds. @Penguin not really sure why you posted, most are aware that virtually all land in this country is managed, and has been for 100s of years, but there are many organisations, local and national government, that manage large areas of land that create appropriate habitats for British nature, including rewilding and reintroductions.  We can all do our bit even if this is not cutting your lawn, and certainly by not concreting over it.  (or plastic grass, urgh).   I have simply been stating that garden birds are semi domesticated, as perhaps the deer herds in Richmond Park, New Forest ponies, and even some foxes where we feed them.  Whoever it was who tried to get a cheap jibe in about Southwark and the Gala festival.  Why?  There is a whole thread on Gala for you to moan on.  Lots going on in Southwark https://www.southwark.gov.uk/culture-and-sport/parks-and-open-spaces/ecology-and-wildlife I've talked about green sqwaky things before, if it was legal I'd happily use an air riffle, and I don't eat meat.  And grey squirrels too where I am encourage to dispatch them. Once a small group of starlings also got into the garden I constructed my own cage using starling proof netting, it worked for a year although I had to make a gap for the great spotted woodpecker to get in.  The squirrels got at it in the summer but sqwaky things still haven't come back, starlings recently returned.  I have a large batch of rubbish suet pellets so will let them eat them before reordering and replacing the netting. Didn't find an appropriately sized cage, the gaps in the mesh have to be large enough for finches etc, and the commercial ones were £££ The issue with bird feeders isn't just dirty ones, and I try to keep mine clean, but that sick birds congregate in close proximity with healthy birds.  The cataclysmic obliteration of the greenfinch population was mainly due to dirty feeders and birds feeding close to each other.  
    • Another recommendation for Niko - fitted me in the next day, simple fix rather than trying to upsell and a nice guy as well. Will use again
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...