Author Topic: Womans Hour Discussion  (Read 11283 times)

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #50 on: 09 July, 2009, 09:03:15 pm »
I don't mind waiting a minute or two. jwo still gets my vote bythe way. Never occurred to me to jump lights either, no need to.

alan

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #51 on: 09 July, 2009, 09:08:13 pm »
How many of you cyclists who advocate "it's ok for cyclists to go on red" drive cars & would do the same when driving?

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #52 on: 09 July, 2009, 09:20:01 pm »
I drive a car - as little as possible - and I agree with teethgrinder.
Getting there...

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #53 on: 09 July, 2009, 10:13:14 pm »
How many of you cyclists who advocate "it's ok for cyclists to go on red" drive cars & would (as drivers) happily drink drive, break the speed limit, park where they want to, use a mobile phone when driving. yadda yadda.


If the law is wrong campaign to change it.

Picking and choosing the laws you want to break and claiming some kind of moral high ground because it suits you is a load of bollocks.
It is simpler than it looks.

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #54 on: 09 July, 2009, 10:33:21 pm »

Picking and choosing the laws you want to break and claiming some kind of moral high ground because it suits you is a load of bollocks.
Now that's an argument I can understand, and agree with  :D
Never knowingly under caffeinated

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #55 on: 09 July, 2009, 10:40:56 pm »

Picking and choosing the laws you want to break and claiming some kind of moral high ground because it suits you is a load of bollocks.
Now that's an argument I can understand, and agree with  :D

+1

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #56 on: 09 July, 2009, 10:43:43 pm »
If we all start jumping lights at pdestrian crossings, the pedestrians will sto using them and try and cross the road and maybe get it wrong, especially if they are blind, very young or whatever.
I prefer to encourage them to use the crossings in total safety and reduce the amount of watching pedestrians that I have to do. If people see you jumping lights, even whenit's safe, then they will learn to expect it. I like it how it is. Red light=stop. Nice and simple. :)

I guess you're not a fan of shared space then?


I am a fan of shared space.

I am also a fan of teethgrinder's.

Riding home tonight I was on a clear road.  Up ahead was a zebra crossing, with pedestrians.  They just stood there as they expected the cyclist to ignore them and blast through  >:(

I had to not only slow (as usual) but signal to them to cross.     



Had other cyclists obeyed the traffic laws I wouldn't have had to slow and they would have crossed easily ahead of me.

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #57 on: 09 July, 2009, 10:48:28 pm »
Riding home tonight I was on a clear road.  Up ahead was a zebra crossing, with pedestrians.  They just stood there as they expected the cyclist to ignore them and blast through  >:(

I had to not only slow (as usual) but signal to them to cross.     
I had the same thing near a school.
Did you use the right arm slowing signal? Everyone else seems think I'm trying to take off lopsidedly instead of telling them I'm slowing.  ::-)

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #58 on: 09 July, 2009, 10:53:05 pm »
further thoughts:



I was in York recently, as driver/pedestrian/cyclist.   Their roundabouts are STUPID as they have cycle feeder lanes that follow around the gutter.  

As a driver I HATED driving on the roundabout as I could see cyclists approaching at speed but did not know if the cyclist was going to:-
 - stop
 - continue in the cycle lane
 - enter the roundabout properly
Therefore I had to slow and hit the brakes to avoid a potential collision even though I had "priority" at the junction.

Cyclists jumping the red light, even if the law is changed, put drivers in the same position.


<O/T>
Worse, I couldn't leave the roundabout as knew that in my blindspot was a cycle lane and cyclists might be undertaking me and not intending to take my exit.    I really can't believe that York Council were allowed to paint this deathtrap!
</ O/T>





Or we could consider a normal junction.  Assuming the law is passed then cyclists would approach knowing they could turn left on red, and as they almost get there the lights change, the cars turn left and crush the cylist as currently happens generating the Woman's Hour discussion and thread!   Do we want to perpetuate these or eradicate them?


The answer is NOT to allow left turn on red but to sort out road safety.

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #59 on: 09 July, 2009, 10:56:47 pm »
Riding home tonight I was on a clear road.  Up ahead was a zebra crossing, with pedestrians.  They just stood there as they expected the cyclist to ignore them and blast through  >:(

I had to not only slow (as usual) but signal to them to cross.     
I had the same thing near a school.
Did you use the right arm slowing signal? Everyone else seems think I'm trying to take off lopsidedly instead of telling them I'm slowing.  ::-)

I did not use the right arm slowing signal as that is an indicator to following traffic - of which there was none.

The only persons on the seafront were myself and the pedestrians.  Not any motorists.  The slowing signal would have confused them.  A gesture and nod went down better.

Wowbagger

  • Stout dipper
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #60 on: 09 July, 2009, 10:56:56 pm »
If the law is wrong campaign to change it.

Can you name me a law that was ever changed without a little civil disobedience?

We had a Southend Cycle Users' Group meeting a couple of months ago in which one of our number was complaining bitterly that whilst he was riding along Southend Sea Front on the road, he was pretty much in a minority of one, every other cyclist he saw riding along the promenade. This is very wide, often deserted, has a much better surface than the road and you can actually sea the sea and the beach for most of its length. Further east along the sea front there is a dual use path, even though the promenade area is no wider there than the western stretch where cycling is, supposedly, forbidden.

I discussed this meeting a few days later with the Road Safety Officer and her view was pretty simple: "If so many people are cycling along there and no-one is getting hurt or complaining, then why is cycling forbidden?"

Another example: along the North Kent promenade, towards Whitstable, there are stretches which are signed "No Cycling" but have 5 mph speed limit signs for the motorists who drive along it.  ???
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

Wowbagger

  • Stout dipper
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #61 on: 09 July, 2009, 10:59:43 pm »
Riding home tonight I was on a clear road.  Up ahead was a zebra crossing, with pedestrians.  They just stood there as they expected the cyclist to ignore them and blast through  >:(

I had to not only slow (as usual) but signal to them to cross.     

Had other cyclists obeyed the traffic laws I wouldn't have had to slow and they would have crossed easily ahead of me.

Not if those pedestrians have got any sense. If you are waiting at a T junction and you see a car signalling left to turn into the road you are leaving, do you believe it and pull out?
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #62 on: 09 July, 2009, 11:00:20 pm »

Riding home tonight I was on a clear road.  Up ahead was a zebra crossing, with pedestrians.  They just stood there as they expected the cyclist to ignore them and blast through  >:(

I had to not only slow (as usual) but signal to them to cross.     



Had other cyclists obeyed the traffic laws I wouldn't have had to slow and they would have crossed easily ahead of me.

That reminds me of a time when I was driving one summer's evening on a straight urban road.

The old bloke wanting to cross the road chose the zebra crossing. He took the rule of  "Approach junction and wait for the traffic to stop" as "Approach junction and wait for a car to arrive."

I saw him about half a mile away. He had a whole minute to cross the road before I got there, but he chose to wait for me to arrive, slow down and stop instead.
Quote from: Kim
Paging Diver300.  Diver300 to the GSM Trimphone, please...

Wowbagger

  • Stout dipper
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #63 on: 09 July, 2009, 11:02:20 pm »

Riding home tonight I was on a clear road.  Up ahead was a zebra crossing, with pedestrians.  They just stood there as they expected the cyclist to ignore them and blast through  >:(

I had to not only slow (as usual) but signal to them to cross.     

Had other cyclists obeyed the traffic laws I wouldn't have had to slow and they would have crossed easily ahead of me.

That reminds me of a time when I was driving one summer's evening on a straight urban road.

The old bloke wanting to cross the road chose the zebra crossing. He took the rule of  "Approach junction and wait for the traffic to stop" as "Approach junction and wait for a car to arrive."

I saw him about half a mile away. He had a whole minute to cross the road before I got there, but he chose to wait for me to arrive, slow down and stop instead.
That occurred to me after I replied to Nutty. That's just poor speed judgement by the peds.
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #64 on: 09 July, 2009, 11:06:48 pm »
Did you use the right arm slowing signal?
I did not use the right arm slowing signal as that is an indicator to following traffic - of which there was none.
Hand signals are for all road users so it could have been of use to the peds.

frankly frankie

  • I kid you not
    • Fuchsiaphile
Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #65 on: 09 July, 2009, 11:18:47 pm »
Illegal is illegal - there isn't a gray area.

Aargh!  [10,000 barristers cut their own throats]

I discussed this meeting a few days later with the Road Safety Officer and her view was pretty simple: "If so many people are cycling along there and no-one is getting hurt or complaining, then why is cycling forbidden?"

IMO pavement-cycling is much more problematic than RLJ (where I'm with jwo 200%).  It seems to be encouraged, in several locations where it is probably illegal.  Who's to know, what is right and what is wrong - no-one rides around with a library of national and local statutes in their head, and signage is definitely not reliable from a legal point of view.

In Switzerland it is the (legal) norm to cycle on-road out of town and on the pavement in town, but there is no signage to indicate to johnny tourist when the transition should take place, you just have to know the local road traffic laws and cope with them, and put up with the police harrassment when you don't.  Ignorance is no defence and all that.
when you're dead you're done, so let the good times roll

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #66 on: 09 July, 2009, 11:25:39 pm »

Riding home tonight I was on a clear road.  Up ahead was a zebra crossing, with pedestrians.  They just stood there as they expected the cyclist to ignore them and blast through  >:(

I had to not only slow (as usual) but signal to them to cross.     

Had other cyclists obeyed the traffic laws I wouldn't have had to slow and they would have crossed easily ahead of me.

That reminds me of a time when I was driving one summer's evening on a straight urban road.

The old bloke wanting to cross the road chose the zebra crossing. He took the rule of  "Approach junction and wait for the traffic to stop" as "Approach junction and wait for a car to arrive."

I saw him about half a mile away. He had a whole minute to cross the road before I got there, but he chose to wait for me to arrive, slow down and stop instead.
That occurred to me after I replied to Nutty. That's just poor speed judgement by the peds.

Indeed.  They could actually have completed 80% of the crossing by the time I'd arrived   ::-)

Manotea

  • Where there is doubt...
Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #67 on: 09 July, 2009, 11:27:19 pm »
If the law is wrong campaign to change it.
Can you name me a law that was ever changed without a little civil disobedience?

As every motorist that has ever picked up a speeding / parking ticket will agree.

NOTE! This comment is about citizens deciding which laws to obey, not about speeding.

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #68 on: 09 July, 2009, 11:27:32 pm »
Did you use the right arm slowing signal?
I did not use the right arm slowing signal as that is an indicator to following traffic - of which there was none.
Hand signals are for all road users so it could have been of use to the peds.

I agree with you.  However which signal is more likely to be obeyed by the pedestrians...


"right arm slowing"

"roll eyes, make eye contact, nod, right hand gesture from right to left as I wave them across the crossing"

Wowbagger

  • Stout dipper
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #69 on: 09 July, 2009, 11:31:53 pm »
Illegal is illegal - there isn't a gray area.

Aargh!  [10,000 barristers cut their own throats]

I discussed this meeting a few days later with the Road Safety Officer and her view was pretty simple: "If so many people are cycling along there and no-one is getting hurt or complaining, then why is cycling forbidden?"

IMO pavement-cycling is much more problematic than RLJ (where I'm with jwo 200%).  It seems to be encouraged, in several locations where it is probably illegal.  Who's to know, what is right and what is wrong - no-one rides around with a library of national and local statutes in their head, and signage is definitely not reliable from a legal point of view.

In Switzerland it is the (legal) norm to cycle on-road out of town and on the pavement in town, but there is no signage to indicate to johnny tourist when the transition should take place, you just have to know the local road traffic laws and cope with them, and put up with the police harrassment when you don't.  Ignorance is no defence and all that.

As with all of these things the nuisance to others is what really matters. If it's a blistering summer's Sunday and the promenade is bursting with families, then it's senseless to cycle there. Throughout the winter, and most summer weekdays, there are fewer pedestrians there and it's quite reasonable to cycle there.

We've got one stretch here which is part of NCN 16 apparently but has a no cycling sign.
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

Karla

  • car(e) free
    • Lost Byway - around the world by bike
Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #70 on: 09 July, 2009, 11:34:07 pm »
On pavement cycling, I agree that these stupid 'shared use path' white lines down pavements are completely counter-productive.  As well as leaving me stranded on pavements when they run out all of a sudden, they get POBs used to riding on pavements.

I was in York recently, as driver/pedestrian/cyclist.   Their roundabouts are STUPID as they have cycle feeder lanes that follow around the gutter.  

As a driver I HATED driving on the roundabout as I could see cyclists approaching at speed but did not know if the cyclist was going to:-
 - stop
 - continue in the cycle lane
 - enter the roundabout properly
Therefore I had to slow and hit the brakes to avoid a potential collision even though I had "priority" at the junction.
York's council generally don't have much sense, despite the number of cyclists.  
Quote
Cyclists jumping the red light, even if the law is changed, put drivers in the same position.
Also in York, there's a shop that runs a big Stop At Red campaign, aimed at cyclists.  Some York motorists I know, can also be heard spouting bile about how cyclists RLJ.  All this despite the fact that in four years of living there, I never saw any hint of RLJing as a general practice.  Maybe a couple of instances, but I honestly can't remember them.  The motorist complaint about RLJ is not rational, it is a stick used to beat cyclists.  It has been promulgated by the media and swallowed by the masses, who'd have never thought of it themselves.  Our abstention from RLJ will not stop the complaints, and if we adopt a holier than thou attitude towards it (like the shop I mentioned), all we will do is raise the profile of the issue still further.

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #71 on: 10 July, 2009, 06:08:45 am »
Quote
iding home tonight I was on a clear road.  Up ahead was a zebra crossing, with pedestrians.  They just stood there as they expected the cyclist to ignore them and blast through  

Maybe they where being considerate to you and waiting for you to pass so you didnt have to stop. I have had a few times whilst approaching a crossing, slowly, to be waved through by the people waiting. I also wave cyclists through when I am in pedestrian mode, although I must add I do not live in London.

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #72 on: 10 July, 2009, 09:12:59 am »
If it's a blistering summer's Sunday and the promenade is bursting with families, then it's senseless to cycle there. Throughout the winter, and most summer weekdays, there are fewer pedestrians there and it's quite reasonable to cycle there.

Unfortunately not everyone considers it senseless so cycling gets prohibited. Not everyone is like you.

Wowbagger

  • Stout dipper
    • Stuff mostly about weather
Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #73 on: 10 July, 2009, 09:15:32 am »
If it's a blistering summer's Sunday and the promenade is bursting with families, then it's senseless to cycle there. Throughout the winter, and most summer weekdays, there are fewer pedestrians there and it's quite reasonable to cycle there.

Unfortunately not everyone considers it senseless so cycling gets prohibited. Not everyone is like you.

There are, of course, alternatives to a cycling ban. "Cyclists give way to pedestrians" is quite a good one, and to be seen in Cambridge city centre. In addition, there's no obvious difference to the stretch of prom which is dual use and the stretch with the cycling ban.

There's no sense to it, it's just arbitrary nonsense from the Council.
Quote from: Dez
It doesn’t matter where you start. Just start.

iakobski

Re: Womans Hour Discussion
« Reply #74 on: 10 July, 2009, 09:23:11 am »
How many of you cyclists who advocate "it's ok for cyclists to go on red" drive cars & would (as drivers)...

When dirving I make a point of jumping red lights when it's safe to do so - it goes some way towards redressing the balance  :demon: :demon:

On my bike I always stop at red & zebras - for the reasons jwo gives. It's important.