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

    • Would wholeheartedly recommend Aria. Quality work, very responsive, lovely guy as well. 
    • A positive update from Southwark Council - “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.“  
    • A solicitor is acting as the executor for our late Aunt's will.  He only communicates by letter which is greatly lengthening the process.  The vast majority of legal people deal by modern means - the Electronic Communications Act that allows for much, if not all of these means is now 25 years old.   Any views and advice out there? In fuller detail: The value of the estate is not high.  There are a number of beneficiaries including one in the US.  It has taken almost three years and there is no end in sight.  The estate (house) is now damp, mouldy and wall paper falling off the wall. The solicitor is hostile, has threatened beneficiaries the police (which would just waste the police's time), and will not engage constructively. He only communicates by letter.  These are poorly written, curt or even hostile, in a language from the middle of last century, he clearly is typing these himself probably on a type writer.  Of course with every letter he makes more money. We've taken the first steps to complain either through the ombudsman and/or the SRA.  We have taken legal advice a couple of times, which of course isn't cheap, and were told that his behaviour is shocking and we'd be in our right to have him removed through the courts. But.... we just want him to get on with executing the will, primarily selling the house. However he refuses to use any other form of communication but letter.  So writing to the beneficiary in the 'States can take a month to get a reply. And even in this country a week or more. Having worked with lawyers in the past I am aware that email, tele and video conferencing and even text and WhatApp are appropriate means for communication.  There could be an immediate response to his questions.   Help!        
    • Labour should be applauded for bringing in the Renter's Rights Act.  But so many of you are carried away with slagging them off. Married couples with busy lives sometimes forget who did what. On this occasion Mr Rachel Reeves was sorting out the rental agreement.  Ms Reeves was a bit flumoxed with all the grief/demonsing/witch hunts she is getting so forgot to check with her other half.   Not the first or last time this will happen with couples. (That's not having a go at the post above)
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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