Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am not against driving at all, and believe that this is good for the economy and for the wealth of the nation. However I feel that as a regular cyclist, I sometimes feel totally afraid when cycling, beacuse during the rush hour you have motorists overtaking you in the non-cycle lanes (fine) and undercutting on the inside left off the slower traffic. Not only this they cut in front of you while you are moving and cut across you to turn left with scant indication of their intentions.


I have not mentioned the red light transgressions I have seen when a motorist is speeding through traffic just to pass the red light to get ahead and save a few valuable seconds just to get caught at the next set of lights.


I have sat at light in an ASL zone, centred and intending to continue straight on and when I checked behind all was was clear, and most drivers were ok and let me go, but a driver who was on the inside lane whizzed past me and turned left in front of me and sped off. Luckily I saw him in time, but then it would have been me at fault #bloodycyclists.


I feel that there needs to be some regulation or training for drivers or some sort of identification methods to monitor rogue drivers (irony alert - there already is yet it doesn't stop some drivers behaving dangerously) As they are road users and they request the same rights privileges as other road user, but some do not want to adere to basic traffic regulations.


Remember they are using the highways for free, yet we are paying for it's maintainance. I would love to hear your views.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/35655-motorists-the-worrying-burden/
Share on other sites

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

    • Green Party policy on driver behaviour: Default 20mph Speed Limits: The party supports making 20 mph the default speed limit in all residential areas. 40mph Speed Limits: Proposing a default 40 mph speed limit in non-residential areas, excluding major roads. Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs): Promoting the expansion of LTNs to reduce "rat-running" in residential areas. Ending Internal Combustion Engine Sales: A target to end the sale of new petrol and diesel vehicles by 2030. Environmental Charging: Implementing a Carbon Tax on fossil fuels to increase the cost of petrol and diesel, incentivizing a shift to electric vehicles or public transport. Prioritizing Active Travel: Shifting funding from road building to walking, cycling, and public transport infrastructure, aiming for 50% of trips in towns and cities to be made by these methods by 2030. Improved Driver Training: Supporting "eco-driving" techniques to reduce emissions and fuel usage.  Some of which is good, some unrealistic, and on driver behaviour doesn't go far enough. Difficult to summarise the Lib Dems position as it is a bit wishy washy wanting to appeal to both the eco warrior and the NIMBY.  Sadly I know people who are both!
    • Why would you have to look for "a good reason to not vote for the greens"? What a very strange thing to say. Would you like to explain your logic?
    • Hi All, Looking for recommendations in the following professions. Ideally based locally. -Psychiatrist -Psychologist  -Therapist (EMDR) -Child Psychiatrist ADHD and ASD exp - ideal Any information would be appriciated. C
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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