John Hearns

sweller wrote:
> John Hearns wrote:
>
>> Advanced Stop Lines are one of the few traffic engineering features
>> which cyclists say they find useful.
>
> So do motorcyclists. Hey, it says "Bicycle" on the tax disc.
I'd just love to see some pedals on a Ducati 950 :-)

Tim Hall

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:52:17 +0100, John Hearns <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

>sweller wrote:
>> John Hearns wrote:
>>
>>> Advanced Stop Lines are one of the few traffic engineering features
>>> which cyclists say they find useful.
>>
>> So do motorcyclists. Hey, it says "Bicycle" on the tax disc.
>I'd just love to see some pedals on a Ducati 950 :-)


"Ducati in increased reliability shock"


Tim

sweller

Tim Hall wrote:

> >> So do motorcyclists. Hey, it says "Bicycle" on the tax disc.
> >
> > I'd just love to see some pedals on a Ducati 950 :-)
>
> "Ducati in increased reliability shock"

I've got a Guzzi so you will not harm me with your puny Ducati related
jibes.

--
Simon

Boots

On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 15:01:46 +0100 in uk.rec.motorcycles, Grimly
Curmudgeon says:

>We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
>drugs began to take hold. I remember Ben <ukrm@bensales.com> saying
>something like:
>
>>>The strength of British apathy never ceases to amaze me.
>>>If a councillor or MP won't give an undertaking to reject this theft,
>>>then argue with them, don't vote for them.
>>
>>Here's a revolutionary concept for you...
>>
>>If you don't want to pay a fine, don't break the law.
>
>Fakrysake, it's yet another turn of the screw.

It's going to encourage more folks to use illegible plates if there's
cameras monitoring every minor indiscretion.

>If someone actually blocks a cycle lane, then fine the bastard,
>but not for just a second's intrusion where there is no one at risk.

NTL


--
Ian

Beav

"sweller" <sweller@mztech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xn0f948q187zjy000@news.individual.net...
> John Hearns wrote:
>
>> > Motoring types have been moaning about the pesky little peddlars and
>> > their SPAD tendencies for quite a while and enforcement of the cycle
>> > lane rules for all parties is going to be part of that.
>>
>> Show us "the rules" which state that cycles must use cycle lanes please.
>
> Oooh touchy!
>
> Although it wasn't the best structured sentence I've ever written "the
> rules" apply to car drivers which the cameras will be enforcing:
>
> "119: Cycle lanes. These are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST
> NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its
> times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a
> broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any
> cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions apply.
> Law RTRA sects 5 & 8"
>
> However the rule that motorists are becoming quite vocal about is traffic
> lights [1]. This is what the Highway Code says about those and cyclists:
>
> "50: You MUST obey all traffic signs and traffic light signals.
> Laws RTA 1988 sect 36, TSRGD reg 10(1)"
>
> The point I'm making is my guess is all the rules applying to the
> relationship between car and pedal bike are likely to be more rigidly
> enforced in the coming months.
>
>
> [1] SPAD is railway shorthand for passing a red light.

But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or ignoring red
lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some sort. Like a reg number,
which they (obviously) don't have. Short of being seen jumping the lights by
plod, they'll just carry on doing it.



--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

sweller

Beav wrote:

> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or ignoring
> red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some sort. Like a reg
> number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short of being seen jumping
> the lights by plod, they'll just carry on doing it.

In Brighton, I've seen a number of plod on bicycles waiting round the
corner by junctions pulling over cyclists who jump the lights. I expect
we'll see more of this across the country.

--
Simon

Marc Brett

On 26 Jul 2007 07:55:14 GMT, "sweller" <sweller@mztech.fsnet.co.uk>
wrote:

>Beav wrote:
>
>> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or ignoring
>> red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some sort. Like a reg
>> number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short of being seen jumping
>> the lights by plod, they'll just carry on doing it.
>
>In Brighton, I've seen a number of plod on bicycles waiting round the
>corner by junctions pulling over cyclists who jump the lights. I expect
>we'll see more of this across the country.

Only if the meedia-led anti-cyclist hysteria continues. These traps are
expensive in manpower, which could be better-utilised, IMHO and probably
plod's, in combatting more serious crimes.

Des

sweller <sweller@mztech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> Beav wrote:

>> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or ignoring
>> red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some sort. Like a reg
>> number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short of being seen jumping
>> the lights by plod, they'll just carry on doing it.

> In Brighton, I've seen a number of plod on bicycles waiting round the
> corner by junctions pulling over cyclists who jump the lights. I expect
> we'll see more of this across the country.

The same is also happening in France ...

http://minilien.fr/a0khe1

It's sort of 'have our cake and eat it'. Cyclists want respect and
consideration from other road users, but also want the discretion to jump
red lights, because their vehicles are supposedly 'different' due to their
light weight etc.

When cycling in Paris, others would often look askance at me when I stopped
at the traffic lights, or when I gave way where it was required. The
Paris police apparently consider that cyclists 'se foutent de la gueule du
monde' ('take the piss out of everyone'). I'd have to agree.

D.
--
des | 'trop d'la balle, j'kiffe grave!'
BMW K100-LT
Key fingerprint = 9BF8 0908 74AE A8A6 A175 F299 B159 29DC 3453 1135

Des

Marc Brett <usenet@fordson.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 26 Jul 2007 07:55:14 GMT, "sweller" <sweller@mztech.fsnet.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>>Beav wrote:
>>
>>> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or ignoring
>>> red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some sort. Like a reg
>>> number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short of being seen jumping
>>> the lights by plod, they'll just carry on doing it.
>>
>>In Brighton, I've seen a number of plod on bicycles waiting round the
>>corner by junctions pulling over cyclists who jump the lights. I expect
>>we'll see more of this across the country.
>
> Only if the meedia-led anti-cyclist hysteria continues. These traps are
> expensive in manpower, which could be better-utilised, IMHO and probably
> plod's, in combatting more serious crimes.

Therefore allowing cyclists to break road traffic law with impunity, and
whinge when others (car drivers, motorcyclists, pedestrians..) do likewise,
you mean?

D.
--
des | 'trop d'la balle, j'kiffe grave!'
BMW K100-LT
Key fingerprint = 9BF8 0908 74AE A8A6 A175 F299 B159 29DC 3453 1135

platypus

Marc Brett wrote:
> On 26 Jul 2007 07:55:14 GMT, "sweller" <sweller@mztech.fsnet.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> Beav wrote:
>>
>>> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or
>>> ignoring red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some
>>> sort. Like a reg number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short
>>> of being seen jumping the lights by plod, they'll just carry on
>>> doing it.
>>
>> In Brighton, I've seen a number of plod on bicycles waiting round the
>> corner by junctions pulling over cyclists who jump the lights. I
>> expect we'll see more of this across the country.
>
> Only if the meedia-led anti-cyclist hysteria continues. These traps
> are expensive in manpower, which could be better-utilised, IMHO and
> probably plod's, in combatting more serious crimes.

The problem with that approach is that you spend all your time on the big
stuff, and the low-grade, day-to-day stuff gets ignored, and keeps on
happening and getting worse. It's about prioritising the workload.
Obviously the plod in Brighton view this seriously enough to allocate
manpower to it. If one of these red-light-jumping cyclists causes a fatal,
the cost would be way in excess of the enforcement costs in any case.

--
platypus

"fastidious and precise"

Dave Larrington

In news:xn0f95mn8lycmv000@news.individual.net,
sweller <sweller@mztech.fsnet.co.uk> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> Beav wrote:
>
>> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or
>> ignoring red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some
>> sort. Like a reg number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short of
>> being seen jumping the lights by plod, they'll just carry on doing
>> it.
>
> In Brighton, I've seen a number of plod on bicycles waiting round the
> corner by junctions pulling over cyclists who jump the lights. I
> expect we'll see more of this across the country.


Likewise in the City of London...

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Never trust a man with more than one moustache.

Matt B

sweller wrote:
> Beav wrote:
>
>> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or ignoring
>> red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some sort. Like a reg
>> number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short of being seen jumping
>> the lights by plod, they'll just carry on doing it.
>
> In Brighton,

Ah, you know Brighton? If so - what do you think of the new "New Road"
scheme? Is it better or worse for cycling than it was before /any/
changes were made, and than it was for the last year or so, when cars
were banned?

--
Matt B

David Hansen

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 07:34:32 GMT someone who may be "Beav"
<beavis.original@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote this:-

>But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or ignoring red
>lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some sort. Like a reg number,
>which they (obviously) don't have. Short of being seen jumping the lights by
>plod, they'll just carry on doing it.

And the identifier which is attached to motor vehicles prevents
their operators ignoring red lights and allows the police to take
action? Fascinating.

I must make a note of the identifier the next time I observe a motor
vehicle operator ignore a red light and tell the police.


--
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

Ian Smith

On Thu, 26 Jul, Beav <beavis.original@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote:
>
> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or
> ignoring red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some
> sort. Like a reg number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short
> of being seen jumping the lights by plod, they'll just carry on
> doing it.

Right.

So that explains why the police are unable to solve any murder,
robbery, assault, or indeed most other crimes - because people don't
have clearly displayed identifying codes front and rear.

But absolutely no criminal offence by any motor vehicle (which does
hve said identifiers) ever goes unpunished. Speeding,
red-light-jumping, illegal parking, driving while not taxed or insured
- none of that happens.

Oh yes. I'm sure that's right.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Hog

Ian Smith wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Jul, Beav <beavis.original@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote:
>>
>> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or
>> ignoring red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some
>> sort. Like a reg number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short
>> of being seen jumping the lights by plod, they'll just carry on
>> doing it.
>
> Right.
>
> So that explains why the police are unable to solve any murder,
> robbery, assault, or indeed most other crimes - because people don't
> have clearly displayed identifying codes front and rear.
>
> But absolutely no criminal offence by any motor vehicle (which does
> hve said identifiers) ever goes unpunished. Speeding,
> red-light-jumping, illegal parking, driving while not taxed or insured
> - none of that happens.
>
> Oh yes. I'm sure that's right.

Lets turn this around then. Why does anyone think that bicycles used on the
public road should not
a) display an identifier
b) pay a road user tax related to the issuance of said identifier
c) be obliged to adhere to the highway code and suffer the same penalties as
motorists when they do not

In addition you should have to join the Tufty Club and pass your Cycling
Proficiency test.

--
Hog
'03 ST4S '96 Bastard12 '89 R100RS '81 XS650 '78 RD400

Beav

"sweller" <sweller@mztech.fsnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xn0f95mn8lycmv000@news.individual.net...
> Beav wrote:
>
>> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or ignoring
>> red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some sort. Like a reg
>> number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short of being seen jumping
>> the lights by plod, they'll just carry on doing it.
>
> In Brighton, I've seen a number of plod on bicycles waiting round the
> corner by junctions pulling over cyclists who jump the lights. I expect
> we'll see more of this across the country.

Not before time, but I can't see anyone getting a ban for their crimes.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

Donald

Hog wrote:
snip other bollocks
> Lets turn this around then. Why does anyone think that bicycles used on the
> public road should not
> a) display an identifier
> b) pay a road user tax related to the issuance of said identifier

I think it would be better to put a "fat bastard" duty on cake and use
it to pay for the identifiers for anyone with a push bike.

> c) be obliged to adhere to the highway code and suffer the same penalties as
> motorists when they do not

I was under the impression that push bikes *are* supposed to adhere to
the highway code so strike.


>
> In addition you should have to join the Tufty Club and pass your Cycling
> Proficiency test.
>

Are you kidding me, there's no walking proficiency test, you just join
the Tufty club and you can just walk anywhere anyway you like.

--
Donald

Beav

"steve auvache" <dont_spam@thecow.me.uk> wrote in message
news:q$9Nl5Ba6jpGFwd0@auvache.force9.co.uk...
> In article <aZqpi.5848$sI3.3386@newsfe6-gui.ntli.net>, Beav <beavis.orig
> inal@ntlwoxorld.com> writes
>
>>I thought wimmin wanted equality.
>
> Nah that is yer dykes want that mate. Wimmin, yer real wimmin that is,
> wanna be shagged through the mattress and out the other side.

I know nuffink about dykes, but I can relate to the latter.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

Beav

"SD" <salad.dodger@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:5gn8omF3hu9vcU1@mid.individual.net...
> On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:49:58 GMT, "Beav"
> <beavis.original@ntlwoxorld.com> wrote:
>
>>I thought wimmin wanted equality. Let them be as unprotected as men and
>>let
>>them die like men I say.
>
> Like the one on Cable St this morning, who sat through a green light
> inspecting her fingernails, then set off when it turned red, and
> nearly rode into the side of a D3 bus.

I want a better result than "nearly", but you're on the right track.


--
Beav

VN 750
Zed 1000
OMF# 19

Martin Dann

sweller wrote:
> Beav wrote:
>
>> But in order for plod to do anything about cyclists jumping or ignoring
>> red lights, the bikes would need an identifyer of some sort. Like a reg
>> number, which they (obviously) don't have. Short of being seen jumping
>> the lights by plod, they'll just carry on doing it.
>
> In Brighton, I've seen a number of plod on bicycles waiting round the
> corner by junctions pulling over cyclists who jump the lights. I expect
> we'll see more of this across the country.

AIUI plod are not allowed to pull over cyclists not
wearing magic foam hats, in case they knock the cyclist over.

Martin.

sweller

Matt B wrote:

> Ah, you know Brighton? If so - what do you think of the new "New Road"
> scheme? Is it better or worse for cycling than it was before any
> changes were made, and than it was for the last year or so, when cars
> were banned?

Where's the New Road? I live in Hove and work at Brighton railway
station.

--
Simon

Matt B

sweller wrote:
> Matt B wrote:
>
>> Ah, you know Brighton? If so - what do you think of the new "New Road"
>> scheme? Is it better or worse for cycling than it was before any
>> changes were made, and than it was for the last year or so, when cars
>> were banned?
>
> Where's the New Road? I live in Hove and work at Brighton railway
> station.

Along the side of the pavilion. They've redesigned it, to allow
pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists to share the same road space.
There is some controversy over the way it has been done, and its
effectiveness.

<http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=new+road,+brighton&sll=5 2.401167,-1.499106&sspn=0.011455,0.025105&ie=UTF8&ll=50.8233 02,-0.139496&spn=0.00593,0.01693&z=17&om=1>
>
<http://tinyurl.com/ypgaoq>

--
Matt B

sweller

Matt B wrote:

> > > Ah, you know Brighton? If so - what do you think of the new "New
> > > Road" scheme? Is it better or worse for cycling than it was before
> > > any changes were made, and than it was for the last year or so,
> > > when cars were banned?
> >
> > Where's the New Road? I live in Hove and work at Brighton railway
> > station.
>
> Along the side of the pavilion. They've redesigned it, to allow
> pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists to share the same road space.
> There is some controversy over the way it has been done, and its
> effectiveness.

I've not taken my pedal bike or motorbike round there so can't really
comment.

--
Simon

Chris N Deuchar

In article <i33EPoDN5ipGFwsi@valleys.demon.co.uk>,
DT@nospam.demon.co.uk says...
> If you want to get pedantic, diving into an empty cycle lane to allow an
> emergency vehicle through would be an offence under this proposal.

No, let the emergency vehicles do it...
They could probably have a wheel or two up the kerb at the same time.
:-)

Chris D
--
The Deuchars BBB#40 COFF#14
Yamaha XV750SE, Suzuki GS550t, Honda CG125 (MSOHP)
http://www.Deuchars.org.uk