That is such a sad story :-( The small minority that achieves it to not make the large quantity of roads safer for cyclists because they don't want to be safe or perhaps just like to wreck good things just because they can.
"... in any other case—slow down and, if necessary, stop to avoid a collision .... "
which is appended ( mutatis mutandis ) to ever so many Victorian road regulation clauses that it is colloquially named The First Rule Of The Road, even though it is not literally listed as such. This encompasses as an obligation under law, to all whom are deemed to be in control of a vehicle, including bicycles. Alongside that, there are ever so many whom were convicted of road offenses under that auspice. I know a magistrate who applies this several times a week, a rule with a long and distinguished pedigree. She says she is perpetually amazed ( though she may be speaking ironically, you can never quite tell with judges ) at the amazement of the accused when this is mentioned to them as the key aspect of their conviction. The law expects that one at least attempts to act safely in a vast range of circumstances, two wrongs don't make a right et al. In this subject here, I reckon we are definitely at the very crazy fringe of the modern identity politics binge.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
There we go Gentlemen, some really good replies here which explore all sides of the problem. That validates bringing the Mk 2 version into being.
There is no point bringing Holland into this as they are not typical throughout the rest of the world. What is typical though is Mike's observation that the aggravation often comes from Alpha males in their 20's. Likely single, no girlfriend, so turn to cycling to unload the pent up tensions and aggression.
In the UK the tide is turning slowly, but we have a long way to go yet. The Olympics in 2012, the Tour De Yorkshire, Prudential Ride London, London congestion & emissions zone, all have generated a new interest in cycling. So the politicians all jumped on the bandwagon. Resulting in Boris Bikes, and the proliferation of Mini Holland cycling schemes. Millions are being spent for a minority that the majority don't want. But at present it is cool to be seen to go green and it gets votes.
My road is part of the popular route from London to Richmond Park and onto Hampton Court. We regularly have unofficial Club time trials. A week ago about 7am I was waiting at a Pelican crossing for the green man to cross the road. One of these lycra clad idiots head down at 30mph saw the red traffic lights, promptly went up on the pavement, nearly knocked over a woman with a kiddie in a push chair, back on the road and away. I reported it to the police but these guys don't wear any Club markings.
You often see a family out cycling with the kids on the inside next to the kerb, dad as outrider abreast, and mum bringing up the rear. They take up a whole car lane and nobody can get past. Quite socially unacceptable. But I am also seeing more and more people leaning out of cars shouting f'ing cyclists which you didn't see a few years ago.
Yes the tide is turning. When politicians don't see any benefit from the green cycling vote, Councillors and Mayors get voted out for spending money on Mini Holland schemes which pee off motorists, they'll dump them, and we will in time get back to normality.
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
In town ( 40 to 60 km/h limits, depending ) the bicycle lanes are close to 1m wide & so that, by regulation, implies single file use only and ( in case you are wondering ) other aspects of the regulation define 'if practicable' in terms of stationary obstructions to the lane(s). Specifically 'if practicable' does not even vaguely translate ( case law now ) to "if the mood takes me" or "unless I'm in a hurry" or "someone stopped in front of me" or "she looked at me strange" or "if I cannot be caught out" and the like. I have relatives who are police veterans, some in the Traffic Operations Group ( "Toggies" ), and this is the source of much of my information. Anyway the nett effect is to separate bicycle and other vehicle travel in this 'virtual' sense ie. without a physical barrier. But that requires care/compliance by all users, which in turn begins with giving a crap about the topic at all. If anything it's possible that dividing devices may be required to enforce the obvious.
The small subset ( drivers and/or riders ) I have described seem to insert a personal "except for ME!" clause into their interpretation of the laws, to the extent that they analyse it at all, and thus I would presume to extend that to other aspects of their lives. Hence I am illustrating those who can't typically perform in adult co-operative modes for mutual benefit, they would probably also cut-in on a supermarket checkout queue, the ATM etc. Or for that matter be yelling at cyclists when they get into a car .....
For that matter : the far, far greater risk to one & all is an angry young man driving a car. Not one riding a push-bike. Over the years I've seen the results of both in spades and I'll prefer the latter over the former any day. I believe this to be an important perspective to relate to you all. For every deceased lady hit by a bicyclist with no brakes I could show you stacks of bodies in a mortuary. Well, that was too literal but I hope you get the idea.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Then I query whether such young children should be on the road in the first place, and also question the wisdom of the parents in allowing it.
"I'm going to teach my children road sense so keep out of my way while I do, if it inconveniences you, tough", is that your attitude?
I mean, an inexperienced cyclist that looks back might also unintentionally (slightly) change his/her direction. On a busy road with minimal space for a single cyclist that could be fatal. Especially when someone is driving by that does not want to give an extra inch when passing by. Forbid any cyclist with less then x years of experience to ride a bicycle because they might potentially hinder Chris S in passing by without giving an extra inch? Is that your attitude?
Fortunately I live in Holland, a country that is ahead of its time on many ways, the rest of the world generally follows, with: gay marriage, euthanasia, etc.
Here cycling paths are normal where for both directions two cyclists can safely cycle next to one another. It's considered perfectly normal to cycle next to someone. It's also perfectly normal for parents and schools to teach children how to safely participate in traffic (on a bicycle). Children here learn to cycle at around 3 years of age, while being able to cycle alone through traffic at around 6 years of age (but that is on safe cycling infrastructure).
It is also a fact that apart from walking it is far less polluting then any other alternative mode of transportation.
It should therefore IMHO be optimally facilitated, while car use should be discouraged as that is among the greatest causes for global warming and climate change.
In the majority of cars there is only one person yet you take up more space on that same road then I do when cycling next to my child. What gives you the right to complain, why would a car deserve so much more space? I don't get your attitude, everyone should get out of your way because you might loose a couple of seconds?
Cyclists should be banned from the road so everything will at last return to the way you once knew things to be? (they won't, population has grown, so has the need for transportation, there are now more traffic jams then 100 years ago and that won't likely reverse)
Should driving lessons no longer be given because a person learning to drive might hinder you and cost you some seconds because well, they are for example likely to let the engine stall at a traffic light? Heaven forbid the holy automobile might be hindered! There of course is no problem when everyone instead steps into a car. Causing all cars to be in a massive traffic jam, that will also cause a requirement for air filtering due to heavy air pollution.
Is this a generation thing? Getting old and no longer wanting to innovate, wanting to keep things as you always knew them to be? It's a challenge for government to make the population adopt a healthy and environmentally friendly alternative to a car. It's either that or accept global warming.
It appears to me that Chris doesn't have or want any alternative to a combustion engine car and would rather wreck the planet his children inherit. It appears to me that he would rather ridicule change then adopt it.
Fortunately I live in Holland, a country that is ahead of its time on many ways, the rest of the world generally follows, with: gay marriage, euthanasia, etc.
Yes, fortunately for the rest of us you do.
Not only gay marriage and euthanasia, you forgot to mention legalised brothels, legalised prostitution, and street cafes legally selling drugs. And no, the rest of the world is not following suit, as much as you might like to think that they are.
Here cycling paths are normal where for both directions two cyclists can safely cycle next to one another. It's considered perfectly normal to cycle next to someone. It's also perfectly normal for parents and schools to teach children how to safely participate in traffic (on a bicycle).
You still seem to fail to understand that your country is not normal compared to the rest of the world. What might work where you live would not work elsewhere.
It should therefore IMHO be optimally facilitated, while car use should be discouraged as that is among the greatest causes for global warming and climate change.
There is no scientific basis for that opinion. Coal and oil fired power stations contribute many times more pollution to the atmosphere than internal combustion engine vehicles.
It's a challenge for government to make the population adopt a healthy and environmentally friendly alternative to a car. It's either that or accept global warming.
MAKE the population? Should that not be ENCOURAGE the general public to adopt more green measures? And in any case there is still no evidence that mankind is contributing any more to global warming than the planet itself is anyway.
It appears to me that Chris doesn't have or want any alternative to a combustion engine car and would rather wreck the planet his children inherit.
Ok you have now finally outed yourself as a political activist for the Green Party. In addition you are falling into the trap of assuming that your way of life in your country is the only way. Perhaps if you could be a little less insular in your thinking you might realise that Holland is a once off, an anomaly that the rest of the world tolerates.
I think your idea of a concrete wall around Holland is excellent. Let's petition Claude Juncker and the EU to fund it. Not to keep the water out but to keep the Dutch in!!!
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
That is such a sad story :-(
That is such a sad story :-( The small minority that achieves it to not make the large quantity of roads safer for cyclists because they don't want to be safe or perhaps just like to wreck good things just because they can.
There is a phrase :"... in
There is a phrase :
"... in any other case—slow down and, if necessary, stop to avoid a collision .... "
which is appended ( mutatis mutandis ) to ever so many Victorian road regulation clauses that it is colloquially named The First Rule Of The Road, even though it is not literally listed as such. This encompasses as an obligation under law, to all whom are deemed to be in control of a vehicle, including bicycles. Alongside that, there are ever so many whom were convicted of road offenses under that auspice. I know a magistrate who applies this several times a week, a rule with a long and distinguished pedigree. She says she is perpetually amazed ( though she may be speaking ironically, you can never quite tell with judges ) at the amazement of the accused when this is mentioned to them as the key aspect of their conviction. The law expects that one at least attempts to act safely in a vast range of circumstances, two wrongs don't make a right et al. In this subject here, I reckon we are definitely at the very crazy fringe of the modern identity politics binge.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
There we go Gentlemen, some
There we go Gentlemen, some really good replies here which explore all sides of the problem. That validates bringing the Mk 2 version into being.
There is no point bringing Holland into this as they are not typical throughout the rest of the world. What is typical though is Mike's observation that the aggravation often comes from Alpha males in their 20's. Likely single, no girlfriend, so turn to cycling to unload the pent up tensions and aggression.
In the UK the tide is turning slowly, but we have a long way to go yet. The Olympics in 2012, the Tour De Yorkshire, Prudential Ride London, London congestion & emissions zone, all have generated a new interest in cycling. So the politicians all jumped on the bandwagon. Resulting in Boris Bikes, and the proliferation of Mini Holland cycling schemes. Millions are being spent for a minority that the majority don't want. But at present it is cool to be seen to go green and it gets votes.
My road is part of the popular route from London to Richmond Park and onto Hampton Court. We regularly have unofficial Club time trials. A week ago about 7am I was waiting at a Pelican crossing for the green man to cross the road. One of these lycra clad idiots head down at 30mph saw the red traffic lights, promptly went up on the pavement, nearly knocked over a woman with a kiddie in a push chair, back on the road and away. I reported it to the police but these guys don't wear any Club markings.
You often see a family out cycling with the kids on the inside next to the kerb, dad as outrider abreast, and mum bringing up the rear. They take up a whole car lane and nobody can get past. Quite socially unacceptable. But I am also seeing more and more people leaning out of cars shouting f'ing cyclists which you didn't see a few years ago.
Yes the tide is turning. When politicians don't see any benefit from the green cycling vote, Councillors and Mayors get voted out for spending money on Mini Holland schemes which pee off motorists, they'll dump them, and we will in time get back to normality.
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
There we go Gentlemen, some
What the hell is going on here? Every time I make a post I get "proxy error" and it says it hasn't gone through. I re-post and it gets there twice.
It's about time this place sorted itself out in many ways. Perhaps I might write to Bruce Allen. He can pay my bar bill :-))
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
Chris S_2 wrote:What the hell
Try https://einsteinathome.org/content/502-error
Thank you for pointing out
Thank you for pointing out the answer, appreciated. Doesn't solve the basic problem though :-(
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now
In town ( 40 to 60 km/h
In town ( 40 to 60 km/h limits, depending ) the bicycle lanes are close to 1m wide & so that, by regulation, implies single file use only and ( in case you are wondering ) other aspects of the regulation define 'if practicable' in terms of stationary obstructions to the lane(s). Specifically 'if practicable' does not even vaguely translate ( case law now ) to "if the mood takes me" or "unless I'm in a hurry" or "someone stopped in front of me" or "she looked at me strange" or "if I cannot be caught out" and the like. I have relatives who are police veterans, some in the Traffic Operations Group ( "Toggies" ), and this is the source of much of my information. Anyway the nett effect is to separate bicycle and other vehicle travel in this 'virtual' sense ie. without a physical barrier. But that requires care/compliance by all users, which in turn begins with giving a crap about the topic at all. If anything it's possible that dividing devices may be required to enforce the obvious.
The small subset ( drivers and/or riders ) I have described seem to insert a personal "except for ME!" clause into their interpretation of the laws, to the extent that they analyse it at all, and thus I would presume to extend that to other aspects of their lives. Hence I am illustrating those who can't typically perform in adult co-operative modes for mutual benefit, they would probably also cut-in on a supermarket checkout queue, the ATM etc. Or for that matter be yelling at cyclists when they get into a car .....
For that matter : the far, far greater risk to one & all is an angry young man driving a car. Not one riding a push-bike. Over the years I've seen the results of both in spades and I'll prefer the latter over the former any day. I believe this to be an important perspective to relate to you all. For every deceased lady hit by a bicyclist with no brakes I could show you stacks of bodies in a mortuary. Well, that was too literal but I hope you get the idea.
Cheers, Mike.
I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...
... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal
Two cyclists should be
Two cyclists should be allowed to ride next to one another, I will want myself in between a young child that cycles on its own and other traffic.
Such young children are slow and unpredictable, but still need to learn by experience.
Quote:Then I query whether
I mean, an inexperienced cyclist that looks back might also unintentionally (slightly) change his/her direction. On a busy road with minimal space for a single cyclist that could be fatal. Especially when someone is driving by that does not want to give an extra inch when passing by. Forbid any cyclist with less then x years of experience to ride a bicycle because they might potentially hinder Chris S in passing by without giving an extra inch? Is that your attitude?
Fortunately I live in Holland, a country that is ahead of its time on many ways, the rest of the world generally follows, with: gay marriage, euthanasia, etc.
Here cycling paths are normal where for both directions two cyclists can safely cycle next to one another. It's considered perfectly normal to cycle next to someone. It's also perfectly normal for parents and schools to teach children how to safely participate in traffic (on a bicycle). Children here learn to cycle at around 3 years of age, while being able to cycle alone through traffic at around 6 years of age (but that is on safe cycling infrastructure).
It is also a fact that apart from walking it is far less polluting then any other alternative mode of transportation.
It should therefore IMHO be optimally facilitated, while car use should be discouraged as that is among the greatest causes for global warming and climate change.
In the majority of cars there is only one person yet you take up more space on that same road then I do when cycling next to my child. What gives you the right to complain, why would a car deserve so much more space? I don't get your attitude, everyone should get out of your way because you might loose a couple of seconds?
Cyclists should be banned from the road so everything will at last return to the way you once knew things to be? (they won't, population has grown, so has the need for transportation, there are now more traffic jams then 100 years ago and that won't likely reverse)
Should driving lessons no longer be given because a person learning to drive might hinder you and cost you some seconds because well, they are for example likely to let the engine stall at a traffic light? Heaven forbid the holy automobile might be hindered! There of course is no problem when everyone instead steps into a car. Causing all cars to be in a massive traffic jam, that will also cause a requirement for air filtering due to heavy air pollution.
Is this a generation thing? Getting old and no longer wanting to innovate, wanting to keep things as you always knew them to be? It's a challenge for government to make the population adopt a healthy and environmentally friendly alternative to a car. It's either that or accept global warming.
It appears to me that Chris doesn't have or want any alternative to a combustion engine car and would rather wreck the planet his children inherit. It appears to me that he would rather ridicule change then adopt it.
Fortunately I live in
Yes, fortunately for the rest of us you do.
Not only gay marriage and euthanasia, you forgot to mention legalised brothels, legalised prostitution, and street cafes legally selling drugs. And no, the rest of the world is not following suit, as much as you might like to think that they are.
You still seem to fail to understand that your country is not normal compared to the rest of the world. What might work where you live would not work elsewhere.
There is no scientific basis for that opinion. Coal and oil fired power stations contribute many times more pollution to the atmosphere than internal combustion engine vehicles.
MAKE the population? Should that not be ENCOURAGE the general public to adopt more green measures? And in any case there is still no evidence that mankind is contributing any more to global warming than the planet itself is anyway.
Ok you have now finally outed yourself as a political activist for the Green Party. In addition you are falling into the trap of assuming that your way of life in your country is the only way. Perhaps if you could be a little less insular in your thinking you might realise that Holland is a once off, an anomaly that the rest of the world tolerates.
I think your idea of a concrete wall around Holland is excellent. Let's petition Claude Juncker and the EU to fund it. Not to keep the water out but to keep the Dutch in!!!
Waiting for Godot & salvation :-)
Why do doctors have to practice?
You'd think they'd have got it right by now