Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Can I just point out that this bill will never become an act of law.


It's a Private Members Bill that will not see the light of day but is a good excuse for everyone, including the media, to get their knickers in a twist over.


Relax.....nothing to see here.

Stats for 2009 (according to paper today):

Pedestrians killed by cyclists: 0

Cyclists killed by motor vehicles: 46


Good use of parliamentary time? Yes or no?

Would the time be better spent forcing lorries to all fit mirrors to allow them to see cyclists in their 'blind spot' or to make cyclist awareness training part of the HGV licence test?


Methinks the MP who is sponsoring this is an attention / headline seeker who thinks that this will boost their career.


What next? Laws banning people using mobile phones while driving? Oh yeah, that one is on the statute book but the police don't enforce it and so many people ignore it that the law might never exist...

That was another waste of parliamentary time!

Most lorry drivers I've come across are incredibly sensitised to cyclists alongside.


I enjoy cycling, although not as a regular commute.


I do have a rule though - NEVER RIDE UP THE INSIDE OF A LORRY.


Do halfwits not look at this situation and go 'Oh my God, Danger danger danger.'???

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> I do have a rule though - NEVER RIDE UP THE INSIDE

> OF A LORRY.

>

> Do halfwits not look at this situation and go 'Oh

> my God, Danger danger danger.'???


_________________________________________________


Agreed, i often thought this too.


However, i have experienced a couple of situations

where with little traffic around a lorry has come thundering

up to the green lights overtaking me very close to the

junction and of course turning left with me intending

on going straight over.


I would resent being called a halfwit had i mad contact

with that truck!

A misunderstanding Pearson, there's a special place in hell for lorry drivers who pull that manoeuvre.


I was referring to the cyclists who roll up the inside of stationary traffic at red lights, and then squeeze (often with one foot on the kerb) down the inside of lorries trying to get an advantage.


It's lethal, and I've seeen it so often, from grown adults, that I'm incredulous.

Nope. There was a skip lorry indicating left at a set of lights near Victoria this morning. There was a narrow cycle feeder lane into the ASL. The lights were likely to change within next 20 seconds but even knowing the phasing, there was no way to judge if 5 secs or 20. I stopped behind truck since didn't want to be alongside if the lights changed. Two cyclists arrived behind me and just continued up the narrow feeder. Thankfully they both made it to the ASL as the lights changed and the skip truck driver held off his turn til they were out of the way. But really... was a stupid move on both cyclist parts

>I'd like to also see some 'incentive' for the minority of pedestrians who cross the road in front my bike with their iPod in or chatting on the phone.

>In the states it's called jay walking and the more I cycle/ride/drive in London the

>more i think we could do with something similiar.


I've been involved in umpteen accidents of this sort not just in my cycle courier days but even now. I mention somewhere else on this forum that I just brace for a crash cos most of the time if I brake hard I go over the handlebars and I'm damned if Im going to swerve around them and risk getting torpedoed from behind.

Once cycling round the roundabout at Deptford Church St, I slowed as a cement truck thundered up to the roundabout as I was about to pass his entrance, and he drove straight onto the roundabout without looking, talking on his mobile phone. If I hadn't slowed, looking him in the eye to see if he was going to stop, I'd be dead.


My rule on a bike is that having right of way doesn't matter if you are under the wheels of a truck or a bus. Truck drivers should be much more aware of cyclists than they are but, more importantly, cyclists should be terrified, wary and totally suspicious of trucks. The cyclists have a lot more to lose than the truck drivers!

Exactly - that's why all this time spent trying to legislate against cyclists on pavement is so infuriating. Being startled by a cyclist, although annoying, just simply isn't as serious an issue as people getting being crushed under the wheels of lorries. That *is* a real major risk to both pedestrians and cyclists and kills many every year - yet no legislative time is being given to making lorries safer and that actually would save lives. It's madness.

>My rule on a bike is that having right of way doesn't matter if you are under the wheels of a truck or a bus. Truck drivers should be much more aware of cyclists than they are but, more importantly, cyclists should be terrified, wary and totally suspicious of trucks. The cyclists have a lot more to lose than the truck drivers!<


I extend that to cars and vans as well. I just cycle defensively. How many times I see a driver (car of lorry) about to pull out of a side road, look my way but don't notice me and pull out. If I don't cycle defensively I probably wouldn't be here now.


I think there should be an advertising campaign similar to the one regarding motorcycles.

Very sobering... the online comments from motorists are even more so.


rifleman - there have been radio advertisements for drivers on looking out for cyclists although I suspect they play it more in the summer months. IIRC, it was a driver saying what he saw as he drove along - bus, roundabout, school, zebra crossing, lights etc etc until you heard a screech of brakes and a crash and then he said 'cyclist'

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

    • Hi, I went to the council's planning portal to look at the application, and I encourage others to look at it. It looks like a pleasant building, with thoughtful landscaping. as Pugwash said, the big oak would be retained, only two smaller trees are supposed to be cut, one of which is already dead according to the Tree Survey. It sounds like 38 people in great need of it will gain supported housing thanks to this development, a very positive change. Of course a solution has to be found for the 3 who will need to find other accommodation during the works, but that doesn't seem enough of a reason to oppose the development. The current building is 4 stories, so I would be surprised if one extra storey was considered objectionable, especially considering the big oak stands between the building and the neighbours' back gardens and the fact that the neighbours it's backing onto are all 5 stories houses themselves or only have blank walls facing the building. In the context where affordable housing is sorely missing, a 100% supported housing development is great news. Personally I've never seen a less objectionable planning request
    • I also wonder if all this, recently events and so many u turns is going to also be the end of Kier Starmer.
    • And I replied: Mandelson and Trump have much in common. They are both shallow, vulgar and vain. They both fetishise wealth and power, irrespective of who holds it or how it was accumulated. They were both close friends and associates of the late Jeffrey Epstein and have moved in the same circles, as Ghislaine Maxwell’s address book allegedly confirms. Recognising another who is utterly transactional and lacking in a moral compass, there’s every chance of “Petie” fitting right in Mar-a-Largo. That Starmer couldn’t anticipate that Mandelson’s past behaviour would be problematic just proves how inept this government is.
    • Can't agree with that because he is a superb communicator - a really smart and  smooth talker. He studied PPE at Oxford and was communications director for Labour for many years.  Setting aside the "minor"  indiscretions during his time in government he has all the smoothness and ability to flatter Trump without appearing obsequious. Plus he can manage and exploit  Trump’s ego. He is highly polished socially, comfortable in elite circles, skilled at making personal connections. He can flatter and disarm, which is a useful tactic with Trump, who responds well to personal respect and praise. As a former EU Trade Commissioner and Cabinet minister, Mandelson understands international relations, trade, and diplomacy. He knows how to frame issues in terms of “wins” that Trump could claim credit for. I honestly hope that he survives.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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