Increased police presence.

[martint235]

Cycling home tonight, going to turn left into a side road that a police van is waiting to turn left out of. Another cyclist comes in the opposite direction to take a right in front of the police down where I'm going: earphones in, dark clothes, no hi-viz, one really shoddy light on the front, no light on the back and no helmet (sorry if the helmet bit offends anyone, just setting the scene).

I'm hearing about all these cyclists getting stopped for no helmet, no hi-viz, earphones and as we've got a prime candidate for practically everything here, you might assume that the police would have flashed their lights or stopped him, or something, any little thing...

Nah!

So why mention it? It's not relevant or important.

 

[Davidsw8]

So why mention it? It's not relevant or important.

"sorry if the helmet bit offends anyone, just setting the scene"

 

[martint235]

"sorry if the helmet bit offends anyone, just setting the scene"

"And there was a woman in a pink dress stood nearby " also sets the scene and is just as relevant

 

[Davidsw8]

"And there was a woman in a pink dress stood nearby " also sets the scene and is just as relevant

Had I seen said lady, I may very well have mentioned her too

 

[Davidsw8]

You missed out a bit. Buckle in one or both wheels necessitating the detachment of the brake straddle cable and consequent lack of stopping ability.

Well spotted Adrian, he was so poorly lit and it was so dark (and I was so distracted by the lack of helmet) that I missed that!

 

[deptfordmarmoset]

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.

I'm biased of course (because I agree and feel the same) but I just wanted to say thank you for an excellent post. So here goes: thank you for an excellent post! Nobody is owning the problem.

 

[400bhp]

Maybe have a word with this Servo driver? Oh you haven't noticed because you're texting.

https://twitter.com/Iain_Houston

Is that a cat on top of the lampost?

 

[Davidsw8]

Is that a cat on top of the lampost?

That is the best thing Ive ever seen

 

[gaz]

[QUOTE 2788573, member: 1314"]The apparent picking on cyclists above drivers by the current surge of looking bored POs will backfire, but it's only for another day or so apparently. I mean, POs shouting at a cyclist with no lights jumping the reds at Stockwell tubes tonight. Fair enough. What about the motorised vehicles parked across that whole junction that cycles have to navigate? Again. The current action by the Met is tokenistic, car-centric and a political exercise to give Boris a fig leaf. The coppers on the whole didn't know, didn't care and didn't care showing it.

Why haven't the cycling associations been consulting with the cops? Why do we have to go back and rely only on the London Greens to make a political impact in the current campaign? (Who are cool as I vote for them.)

The Met and City police are coming across as being anti-cyclist.[/quote]
It's until christmas!

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

OK so let's all put on hi viz, helmets, lights, fluffy pink scarves etc, then have the whole lot cancelled out as soon as it's a bit dull by a forest of daytime running LED's, 365 days a year fog lights and Xenons.
Why not just put up a few signs saying "Bloody well look where you're going!, Put down the mobile!, Stop reading the delivery sheet!" etc etc

 

[EthelF]

If the lights and red and the van has encroached on the ASL, then he should also be having a word with both cyclists, who will have RLJed.

Both cyclists? You mean the Boris biker for straddling the white line? I've often wondered about that - are the lines "in", as in tennis, or "out", as in squash?

 

[Frood42]

Both cyclists? You mean the Boris biker for straddling the white line? I've often wondered about that - are the lines "in", as in tennis, or "out", as in squash?

http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Advanced-Stop-Lines/1400018009433/1400018009433

Motorists
Do not enter the ASL box when the light is red – this space is reserved for the safety of cyclists.
Crossing the first or second ASL line when the light is red makes you liable for a £100 fixed penalty, three points on your licence, and endangers vulnerable road users.

https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/road-junctions-170-to-183

178
Advanced stop lines. Some signal-controlled junctions have advanced stop lines to allow cycles to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached if the lights are amber or red and should avoid blocking the way or encroaching on the marked area at other times, e.g. if the junction ahead is blocked. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time that the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area. Allow cyclists time and space to move off when the green signal shows.
Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10, 36(1) & 43(2)

.

 

[Rouge79]

Taken in a PITCH black hallway. If i get pulled for not wearing hi-viz i'll tell him/her to foxtrot oscar!!!!

 

[fatblokish]

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/Univ...ists-outfits/story-20222781-detail/story.html
So another nail in the coffin for hi-viz?

 

[srw]

[QUOTE 2788573, member: 1314"]The apparent picking on cyclists above drivers by the current surge of looking bored POs will backfire, but it's only for another day or so apparently. I mean, POs shouting at a cyclist with no lights jumping the reds at Stockwell tubes tonight. Fair enough. What about the motorised vehicles parked across that whole junction that cycles have to navigate? Again. The current action by the Met is tokenistic, car-centric and a political exercise to give Boris a fig leaf. The coppers on the whole didn't know, didn't care and didn't care showing it.
[/quote]
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-25100379
150 FPNs issued, mostly for RLJ and mobile phone offences.