Cyclists win police court battle!



On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 20:32:40 GMT, "ian henden" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
>"Tom Crispin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> On 27 Jun 2006 09:15:22 -0700, "Fod" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>If you are driving or cycling safely then you certainly won't be in the
>>>way; if you trying to prevent an overtake on purpose then you are going
>>>against the highwaycode.
>>
>> I tend to cycle in the primary position when approching road
>> narrowings or width restrictions to prevent overtaking. If that goes
>> against the highway code, then that section of the highway code is an
>> ass.
>
>No problem with that. UNLESS there happens to be an adjacent cycle track
>which would take the slower cyclist out of the constriction.


And what if there's a liklihood of broken glass, or other debris, in
the adjacent cycle track?
 
Tom Crispin wrote:
> On 27 Jun 2006 09:15:22 -0700, "Fod" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >If you are driving or cycling safely then you certainly won't be in the
> >way; if you trying to prevent an overtake on purpose then you are going
> >against the highwaycode.
>
> I tend to cycle in the primary position when approching road
> narrowings or width restrictions to prevent overtaking. If that goes
> against the highway code, then that section of the highway code is an
> ass.
thats not trying to prevent someone overtaking, its just sensible road
positioning. LIke i say i've never seen a cyclist on the open road
trying to stop a car overtaking, it would be a risky and stupid thing
to do.

Fod
 
Tony Raven wrote:
> Paul Weaver wrote on 27/06/2006 15:47 +0100:
>
>>
>> you should also (imho) stay out of my way when I'm overtaking you after
>> you rode through that last red light at 8mph or whatever pathetic speed
>> you do, if oyu want to move out, indicate like the rest of us do.
>>
>
> Isn't 8mph about the average speed of motor traffic in London?
>

Nah. It soars _way_ up to a heady 10.5 ish these days.

Pete
 
Don Whybrow wrote:

> IMO I see far more peds crossing against a red than all others combined.

in parts of Old London Town Divine (and almost all of the City) there
are no red/green ped lights to give you any clue when it is safe to
cross; I speak from the POV of a parent who has had to negotiate the
junctions to Great Ormond St for many years with puchchairs, slow
moving little persons etc. Cyclists not the main problem here either.
 
Ningi wrote on 27/06/2006 22:13 +0100:
> Tony Raven wrote:
>> Paul Weaver wrote on 27/06/2006 15:47 +0100:
>>
>>>
>>> you should also (imho) stay out of my way when I'm overtaking you after
>>> you rode through that last red light at 8mph or whatever pathetic speed
>>> you do, if oyu want to move out, indicate like the rest of us do.
>>>
>>
>> Isn't 8mph about the average speed of motor traffic in London?
>>
>
> Nah. It soars _way_ up to a heady 10.5 ish these days.
>

Citroen measured it this year at just 7mph in London. Just what you buy
a performance car for.


--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
 
Tony Raven wrote:


> Citroen measured it this year at just 7mph in London. Just what you buy
> a performance car for.

and in this evening's Standard; traffic levels back up to what they
were before CC'ing
 
In message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
<[email protected]> writes
>Paul Weaver wrote on 27/06/2006 15:47 +0100:
>> you should also (imho) stay out of my way when I'm overtaking you
>>after
>> you rode through that last red light at 8mph or whatever pathetic speed
>> you do, if oyu want to move out, indicate like the rest of us do.
>>
>
>Isn't 8mph about the average speed of motor traffic in London?

What effect do you imagine limiting traffic to the mean would have on
the value of the mean?

--
Steve Walker
 
Steve Walker wrote on 27/06/2006 22:48 +0100:
> In message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
> <[email protected]> writes
>> Paul Weaver wrote on 27/06/2006 15:47 +0100:
>>> you should also (imho) stay out of my way when I'm overtaking you after
>>> you rode through that last red light at 8mph or whatever pathetic speed
>>> you do, if oyu want to move out, indicate like the rest of us do.
>>>
>>
>> Isn't 8mph about the average speed of motor traffic in London?
>
> What effect do you imagine limiting traffic to the mean would have on
> the value of the mean?
>

It would stop dead.

Next.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
 
In message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
<[email protected]> writes

>>> Isn't 8mph about the average speed of motor traffic in London?
>> What effect do you imagine limiting traffic to the mean would have
>>on the value of the mean?

>It would stop dead.

Applied recursively, eventually. Cue Zeno's paradox. That wasn't what I
had in mind, though.



--
Steve Walker
 
ian henden wrote:
> "Tom Crispin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > On 27 Jun 2006 09:15:22 -0700, "Fod" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>If you are driving or cycling safely then you certainly won't be in the
> >>way; if you trying to prevent an overtake on purpose then you are going
> >>against the highwaycode.
> >
> > I tend to cycle in the primary position when approching road
> > narrowings or width restrictions to prevent overtaking. If that goes
> > against the highway code, then that section of the highway code is an
> > ass.
>
> No problem with that. UNLESS there happens to be an adjacent cycle track
> which would take the slower cyclist out of the constriction.

Wouldn't it be better to reduce car use and consequent overtaking and
congestion at a stroke, instead of relegating cyclists to some off road
backwater? Cyclists have all most as much right to use public roads as
motorists, except wher they are denied access to some A roads and
Hitlerian style motorways, where they are plainly discriminated
against.

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
"The car, more of a toilet than a convenience".
 
Steve Walker wrote on 28/06/2006 00:06 +0100:
> In message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
> <[email protected]> writes
>
>>>> Isn't 8mph about the average speed of motor traffic in London?
>>> What effect do you imagine limiting traffic to the mean would have
>>> on the value of the mean?
>
>> It would stop dead.
>
> Applied recursively, eventually. Cue Zeno's paradox. That wasn't what I
> had in mind, though.
>

Should be immediately. The only solution to the mean and the maximum
being the same is if the speed is a delta function and the only
practically realisable delta function for traffic is zero speed. Ergo
the limit when introduced would have to be zero[1]

[1] excepting that it is not unknown for governments to legislate for
non-physical solutions such as pi being 3.0

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
 
"Tom Crispin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 20:32:40 GMT, "ian henden" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Tom Crispin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>>> On 27 Jun 2006 09:15:22 -0700, "Fod" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If you are driving or cycling safely then you certainly won't be in the
>>>>way; if you trying to prevent an overtake on purpose then you are going
>>>>against the highwaycode.
>>>
>>> I tend to cycle in the primary position when approching road
>>> narrowings or width restrictions to prevent overtaking. If that goes
>>> against the highway code, then that section of the highway code is an
>>> ass.
>>
>>No problem with that. UNLESS there happens to be an adjacent cycle
>>track
>>which would take the slower cyclist out of the constriction.
>
>
> And what if there's a liklihood of broken glass, or other debris, in
> the adjacent cycle track?

Then you deal with that separate hazard in exactly the same way that you
deal with broken glass, or other debris, should that hazard occur in the
constriction (which might well have been caused by the *provision* of the
cycle path/route/track.)
 
On 27 Jun 2006 14:32:41 -0700 someone who may be "MartinM"
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>in parts of Old London Town Divine (and almost all of the City) there
>are no red/green ped lights to give you any clue when it is safe to
>cross; I speak from the POV of a parent who has had to negotiate the
>junctions to Great Ormond St for many years with puchchairs, slow
>moving little persons etc. Cyclists not the main problem here either.

You must be lying. We have been told repeatedly that motorists are
pure as the driven snow and cyclists the scum of the earth.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 07:39:06 GMT someone who may be "ian henden"
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>> And what if there's a liklihood of broken glass, or other debris, in
>> the adjacent cycle track?
>
>Then you deal with that separate hazard in exactly the same way that you
>deal with broken glass, or other debris, should that hazard occur in the
>constriction (which might well have been caused by the *provision* of the
>cycle path/route/track.)

Debris in the constriction is likely to be swept out of the way by
the wheels of motor vehicles, so a cyclist is less likely to find it
than in a bike bantustan.

I don't understand the point you are trying to make in the brackets.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
Tony Raven wrote:
> Steve Walker wrote on 27/06/2006 22:48 +0100:
> > In message <[email protected]>, Tony Raven
> > <[email protected]> writes
> >> Paul Weaver wrote on 27/06/2006 15:47 +0100:
> >>> you should also (imho) stay out of my way when I'm overtaking you after
> >>> you rode through that last red light at 8mph or whatever pathetic speed
> >>> you do, if oyu want to move out, indicate like the rest of us do.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Isn't 8mph about the average speed of motor traffic in London?
> >
> > What effect do you imagine limiting traffic to the mean would have on
> > the value of the mean?
>
> It would stop dead.

It might increase. Theory of constraints suggests that the 8mph is the
result of a bottle-neck in the critical chain, mitigated by buffer(s)
up-stream of it. Limiting all traffic
to that speed prevents the buffers being consumed, so cars will more
often find stretches of empty road where they can exceed the speed
limit, possibly raising the mean, although system throughput might
remain at 8mph.
 
sothach wrote on 28/06/2006 09:02 +0100:
>
> It might increase. Theory of constraints suggests that the 8mph is the
> result of a bottle-neck in the critical chain, mitigated by buffer(s)
> up-stream of it. Limiting all traffic
> to that speed prevents the buffers being consumed, so cars will more
> often find stretches of empty road where they can exceed the speed
> limit, possibly raising the mean, although system throughput might
> remain at 8mph.
>

ISTR that is the theory behind the M25 variable speed limits - you can
actually speed up the traffic flow by reducing the maximum allowed speed.

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
 
Al C-F wrote on 28/06/2006 14:07 +0100:
>
> I would position myself in the primary position to prevent someone
> overtaking at a pinch point, because I don't think that overtaking at
> that point is safe.
>
> Approaching a blind corner or hump-backed bridge, I would also
> position myself to prevent a following vehicle overtaking, again
> because it would not be safe.
>
> In both cases, I am avoiding being cut up when the overtaker realises
> either the lack of space or the oncoming traffic, but I am
> *preventing them from overtaking*.
>

And its interesting how often you hear panic braking behind as a car
that thought it was going to overtake you in a pinch point realises it
can't. More than once I've had a car overtake on the other side of the
central reservation of a pinch point, sometimes with oncoming traffic
that has had to take action to avoid a collision. But then we all know
that a few seconds are immensely more valuable for some motorists than
the lives of others

--
Tony

"Anyone who conducts an argument by appealing to authority is not using
his intelligence; he is just using his memory."
- Leonardo da Vinci
 
"David Hansen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 07:39:06 GMT someone who may be "ian henden"
> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
>>> And what if there's a liklihood of broken glass, or other debris, in
>>> the adjacent cycle track?
>>
>>Then you deal with that separate hazard in exactly the same way that you
>>deal with broken glass, or other debris, should that hazard occur in the
>>constriction (which might well have been caused by the *provision* of the
>>cycle path/route/track.)
>
> Debris in the constriction is likely to be swept out of the way by
> the wheels of motor vehicles, so a cyclist is less likely to find it
> than in a bike bantustan.

So if the cycle path is sufficiently used, then the debris will be swept
out/ to the edge/ whatever.


>
> I don't understand the point you are trying to make in the brackets.

Allow me to explain.

Imagine a road twenty feet wide.
The powersthatbe decide that at a particular point there will be "traffic
calming".
They build a little island, about two feet wide, with a path for cycles
about three feet wide between the new little island and the original kerb.

The road for traffic is now only fifteen feet wide, instead of twenty feet,
and the lycra brigade have their own dedicated through route.

Not too difficult?

>
>
> --
> David Hansen, Edinburgh
> I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
> http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
"Al C-F" <[email protected]> wrote in
message
news:20060628090252.26e30dca.aloysius_cholmondeley_featherstonehawe@hotmail.com...
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 07:39:06 GMT
> "ian henden" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Tom Crispin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 20:32:40 GMT, "ian henden" <[email protected]>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >>"Tom Crispin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >>news:[email protected]...
>> >>> On 27 Jun 2006 09:15:22 -0700, "Fod" <[email protected]>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>>If you are driving or cycling safely then you certainly won't be in
>> >>>>the
>> >>>>way; if you trying to prevent an overtake on purpose then you are
>> >>>>going
>> >>>>against the highwaycode.
>> >>>
>> >>> I tend to cycle in the primary position when approching road
>> >>> narrowings or width restrictions to prevent overtaking. If that goes
>> >>> against the highway code, then that section of the highway code is an
>> >>> ass.
>> >>
>> >>No problem with that. UNLESS there happens to be an adjacent cycle
>> >>track
>> >>which would take the slower cyclist out of the constriction.
>> >
>> >
>> > And what if there's a liklihood of broken glass, or other debris, in
>> > the adjacent cycle track?
>>
>> Then you deal with that separate hazard in exactly the same way that you
>> deal with broken glass, or other debris, should that hazard occur in the
>> constriction (which might well have been caused by the *provision* of the
>> cycle path/route/track.)
>>
>>
>
> But there's seldom any glass or other debris in the constriction, because
> the cars and 'buses sweep the road clear. The adjacent cycle path is not
> swept in the same manner.

Amazing just how much glass there is in these areas, and NEVER any on the
road, and how incapable the cyclists are at dealing with it.....
 
"ian henden" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Al C-F" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message
> news:20060628090252.26e30dca.aloysius_cholmondeley_featherstonehawe@hotmail.com...
>> On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 07:39:06 GMT
>> "ian henden" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Tom Crispin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>> > On Tue, 27 Jun 2006 20:32:40 GMT, "ian henden" <[email protected]>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>"Tom Crispin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> >>news:[email protected]...
>>> >>> On 27 Jun 2006 09:15:22 -0700, "Fod" <[email protected]>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>>If you are driving or cycling safely then you certainly won't be in
>>> >>>>the
>>> >>>>way; if you trying to prevent an overtake on purpose then you are
>>> >>>>going
>>> >>>>against the highwaycode.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I tend to cycle in the primary position when approching road
>>> >>> narrowings or width restrictions to prevent overtaking. If that
>>> >>> goes
>>> >>> against the highway code, then that section of the highway code is
>>> >>> an
>>> >>> ass.
>>> >>
>>> >>No problem with that. UNLESS there happens to be an adjacent cycle
>>> >>track
>>> >>which would take the slower cyclist out of the constriction.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > And what if there's a liklihood of broken glass, or other debris, in
>>> > the adjacent cycle track?
>>>
>>> Then you deal with that separate hazard in exactly the same way that you
>>> deal with broken glass, or other debris, should that hazard occur in the
>>> constriction (which might well have been caused by the *provision* of
>>> the
>>> cycle path/route/track.)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> But there's seldom any glass or other debris in the constriction, because
>> the cars and 'buses sweep the road clear. The adjacent cycle path is not
>> swept in the same manner.
>
> Amazing just how much glass there is in these areas, and NEVER any on the
> road, and how incapable the cyclists are at dealing with it.....

More to the point is how unobservant motorists are in not noticing such
debris.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Oxford cyclists win again
Replies
20
Views
1K
UK and Europe
Andrew Chadwick
A
C
Oxford cyclists win again
Replies
20
Views
853
UK and Europe
Andrew Chadwick
A
Carlo Pancaldi
Shrine Of Madonna Del Ghisallo - The Patroness Of Cyclists
Replies
0
Views
2K
UK and Europe
Carlo Pancaldi
Carlo Pancaldi
Starfish
Calling all spinners & cyclists! Take on a 24 or 12 hour challenge!
Replies
0
Views
1K
UK and Europe
Starfish
Starfish
Tetiana
Help of cyclists from France and Austria needed!
Replies
0
Views
1K
UK and Europe
Tetiana
Tetiana
Top Bottom Back