Increased police presence.

[ianrauk]

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/tran...-stopped-him-during-safety-blitz-8962080.html
This fella wasnt very pleased at being pulled over.
We need more parents like this, and the balance has to swing back in favour of the casual cyclist.

Quite pathetic really....
Oi copper..do something useful. See that bin by the junction? Well someone has dumped a load of cardboard next to it. Litterbugs. Go find out who.

 

[Frood42]

Might not be doing anything illegal but I wouldn't put my kids in that and cycle round Euston, crikey... Mind you, I've seen worse.

"Seen worse" makes it sound like there is something wrong with doing this (don't know if you meant it that way ).

I would agree with @Beebo , in that we need more people like this out and about.

I had to laugh though, they just had to get in the obligatory driver quote about how cyclists take liberties.

But lorry driver, Ian Arnold, 58, from Essex, disagreed. He said: “Cyclists take liberties, they drive all over the place and come up down the side of the road, they go through red lights, everything. When the police are here they behave but usually they’re all over the place. I drive in central London so I see it all the time.”

I suppose they had to balance out the more sensible comment from earlier:

Matthew Gidley, 42, who works in marketing and commutes by train from Birmingham before getting on his bike, said: “I’ve always felt safe cycling in London, but what the Mayor said about cyclists needing to be more aware sends a coded message to drivers that cyclists are in the wrong.
“There’s the feeling that the ‘swarms of cyclists’ have somehow got out of control and now they deserve this or something. That needs to be reigned in a bit.”

Although the lorry drivers comments looks somewhat out of place when you then read:

Last Monday, the Met carried out spot-checks on cyclists and HGVs in Vauxhall.
In four hours, the officers stopped 70 lorries and issued 15 fixed penalty notices for offences such as the vehicles not being fit for the road.

.

 

[Davidsw8]

"Seen worse" makes it sound like there is something wrong with doing this (don't know if you meant it that way ).

I kinda did...

If he's confident that they're safe and the kids are fine about it then great, it just wouldn't be my first choice method for ferrying my kids to school. They do look pretty squished in there and helmet debate aside, why has one got one on (incorrectly) but the other doesn't?

I'm all for leading by example and getting more people on bikes but not like this, it's just too dangerous and so not worth it... Maybe a pretty unpopular thing to say on here but what the hey

 

[Frood42]

I kinda did...

If he's confident that they're safe and the kids are fine about it then great, it just wouldn't be my first choice method for ferrying my kids to school. They do look pretty squished in there and helmet debate aside, why has one got one on (incorrectly) but the other doesn't?

I'm all for leading by example and getting more people on bikes but not like this, it's just too dangerous and so not worth it... Maybe a pretty unpopular thing to say on here but what the hey

Ok, we can agree to disagree, but I shall have to give you a thumbs down and a shake of the head
I would love to see 4x4's gone and more people using these on the school run and around town.
.

 

[jowwy]

Most of my commute cycling, well 95% at least is done on cycle paths - but there is a stretch off road that i have to use on the way home thats uphill and about 1/4mile long that can be a bit hairy. but then i wear this to wrk in the winter



and these overshoes


i also wear these


my work colleagues thank me for making myself look so visable to other road users, along with my lights.

now if they can't see a 16.5stone cyclist wearing this gear, then maybe they shouldnt be driving

 

[Markymark]

now if they can't see a 16.5stone cyclist wearing this gear, then maybe they shouldnt be driving

They shouldn't be driving if they can't see you without it either.

 

[jowwy]

They shouldn't be driving if they can't see you without it either.

thats very true - but i did have a driver once pull out on me and try and say they never saw me - i was wearing a bright red cycling jersey, riding a red and white bike and at that stage i was 19stone

 

[Davidsw8]

Like I say, I personally wouldn't choose to do this but if they're all fine about it then that's fantastic.

I think there's a scale of risk and (depending on the distance), walking or driving them to school is possibly a lower risk then this (going on the assumption that the level of parental competence in each situation is the same).

I don't have any comparative stats on how many children die for each mode of transport but I don't base my perceptions of safety on death stats...

 

[Davidsw8]

Ok, we can agree to disagree, but I shall have to give you a thumbs down and a shake of the head
I would love to see 4x4's gone and more people using these on the school run and around town.
.

Completely agree re: the 4x4's, I don't see the 4x4 or that contraption as the only alternatives though.

 

[Frood42]

but then i wear this to wrk in the winter
now if they can't see a 16.5stone cyclist wearing this gear, then maybe they shouldnt be driving

My eyes! My eyes! Aaarrrggghhh, I cannot see! My eyes!

Sorry fella, couldn't resist!

If that is what you want to wear then so be it, but without or without this choice of colours, if they cannot see you, they shouldn't be driving.
If you feel these are the steps you need to take to make you comfortable on the road then that is your personal choice.

Wouldn't you rather go for something like this instead?
With the reflectives?

.

 

[MichaelO]

"Seen worse" makes it sound like there is something wrong with doing this (don't know if you meant it that way ).

Whatever the legalities of it all are - I wouldn't choose to put my kids in that while cycling through rush hour London. That's not to say others shouldn't have the choice to use that sort of thing (without wrongfully being pulled up by the coppers)

 

[stowie]

Let us suppose you are losing an argument. The facts are overwhelmingly against you, and the more people focus on the reality the worse it is for you and your case. Your best bet in these circumstances is to perform a manoeuvre that a great campaigner describes as “throwing a dead cat on the table, mate”.

That is because there is one thing that is absolutely certain about throwing a dead cat on the dining room table – and I don’t mean that people will be outraged, alarmed, disgusted. That is true, but irrelevant. The key point, says my Australian friend, is that everyone will shout “Jeez, mate, there’s a dead cat on the table!”; in other words they will be talking about the dead cat, the thing you want them to talk about, and they will not be talking about the issue that has been causing you so much grief.

Who do you suppose wrote this in an article in the Telegraph? None other than Boris (although he was defending banker bonuses).

Well, I think Boris has managed to throw a dead cat squarely on the table. Everything is about whether we should be wearing plastic hats and yellow jackets and if listening to an ipod whilst on a bicycle is just asking to be run over.

And if we now complain that none of this is the point people simply say we are defending law breaking (even though none of the above is against the law). And, by Friday, I suspect the press will be bored of the debate and the TfL cyclist protest will get minimal coverage.

Boris has won this. By basically throwing any promotion of cycling away and playing upon common prejudices against cycling. I don't care how much money he allocates for cycling or how much he cycles himself, he needed to be a calm, rational voice in the last week and chose instead to play to the gallery hoping that everyone would forget exactly where and how these accidents are occurring.

I am very, very angry.

 

[Frood42]

Whatever the legalities of it all are - I wouldn't choose to put my kids in that while cycling through rush hour London. That's not to say others shouldn't have the choice to use that sort of thing (without wrongfully being pulled up by the coppers)

You should though feel that you have the choice to do so, even in rush hour...
.

 

[martint235]

I kinda did...

If he's confident that they're safe and the kids are fine about it then great, it just wouldn't be my first choice method for ferrying my kids to school. They do look pretty squished in there and helmet debate aside, why has one got one on (incorrectly) but the other doesn't?

I'm all for leading by example and getting more people on bikes but not like this, it's just too dangerous and so not worth it... Maybe a pretty unpopular thing to say on here but what the hey

They are both wearing helmets, badly but wearing them.

 

[jowwy]

My eyes! My eyes! Aaarrrggghhh, I cannot see! My eyes!

Sorry fella, couldn't resist!

If that is what you want to wear then so be it, but without or without this choice of colours, if they cannot see you, they shouldn't be driving.
If you feel these are the steps you need to take to make you comfortable on the road then that is your personal choice.

Wouldn't you rather go for something like this instead?
With the reflectives?

View attachment 33088
.

No