Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
the quest for safety
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 09:18:19 +0100, Bagpuss wrote: So you're the one driver who never speeds. No, I'm the /one/ driver who never speeds, he's the /other/ one. So you have never *ever* drifted even .001 mph over the posted limit? Many times. In the past I've deliberately driven at speeds up to an indicated 140mph, but these days I make a habit of keeping within the posted limit. You just selectively ignore other parts of the Highway Code that you disagree with, as you have admitted here before. http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk: Respectable rules for responsible people But as we know Rules 45-66 are more honoured in the breach than the observance. And unless you make a point of never even approaching the posted limit, you're bound to drift over it by one or two mph on your speedo from time to time. -- http://www.speedlimit.org.uk "Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group) |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
the quest for safety
W K wrote:
"PeterE" wrote in message ... Just zis Guy, you know? wrote: In the past I've deliberately driven at speeds up to an indicated 140mph, but these days I make a habit of keeping within the posted limit. You just selectively ignore other parts of the Highway Code that you disagree with, as you have admitted here before. As for the HC - theres a possibility that he's not talking about places where it applies. He has specifically admitted contravening Rule 55 on a regular basis. Likewise I make no claims to scrupulous adherence to Rule 103. -- http://www.speedlimit.org.uk "If laws are to be respected, they must be worthy of respect." |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
the quest for safety
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 21:54:11 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote: On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 09:18:19 +0100, Bagpuss wrote: So you're the one driver who never speeds. No, I'm the /one/ driver who never speeds, he's the /other/ one. So you have never *ever* drifted even .001 mph over the posted limit? Many times. In the past I've deliberately driven at speeds up to an indicated 140mph, but these days I make a habit of keeping within the posted limit. Heh, impressive, I've only been up to about 80+ then decided I didn't like the wind noise. For my next bike I want a supermotard, lots of grunt, decent handling and fun at 60. At the moment I'm having far to much fun on my new mountain bike to even bother with the m/cycle. I've just drained the tank down to enough to get to the petrol station. I should have a week or two before the petrol starts going seriously off. -- This post does not reflect the opinions of all saggy cloth cats be they a bit loose at the seams or not GSX600F - Matilda the (now) two eared teapot, complete with white gaffer tape, though no rectal chainsaw |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
the quest for safety
In article , Ian G Batten
writes In article , Richard wrote: Is anyone here arguing we should require people to work close to where they live? Yes. If people live closer to their work £285,000 for a studio flat in Canary Wharf. -- "The road to Paradise is through Intercourse." The uk.transport FAQ; http://www.huge.org.uk/transport/FAQ.html [email me at huge [at] huge [dot] org [dot] uk] |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
the quest for safety
Ian G Batten writes:
In article , Huge wrote: Yes. If people live closer to their work £285,000 for a studio flat in Canary Wharf. Such a policy would rapidly stop the concentation of business in London, That would suit me down to the gorund, since I wouldn't have to pay Thameslink £3K a year to be reamed up the arse any more. -- "The road to Paradise is through Intercourse." The uk.transport FAQ; http://www.huge.org.uk/transport/FAQ.html [email me at huge [at] huge [dot] org [dot] uk] |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
the quest for safety
"PeterE" wrote in message
... [me] In the past I've deliberately driven at speeds up to an indicated 140mph, but these days I make a habit of keeping within the posted limit. [you] You just selectively ignore other parts of the Highway Code that you disagree with, as you have admitted here before. No, I don't ignore them at all. I do my best to keep within the rules, but sometimes find it necessary to break them for my own safety. It is safer for me to be in front of the line at a light-controlled junction than parked in the gutter alongside a car. Where I break a rule it is deliberate and for a reason, and if I'm nicked for it I won't bleat about the injustice. [bill] As for the HC - theres a possibility that he's not talking about places where it applies. Not the case: I was a speeding motorist for some years. I also used to drive when excessively tired. Both behaviours have now ceased. [you] He has specifically admitted contravening Rule 55 on a regular basis. Likewise I make no claims to scrupulous adherence to Rule 103. Yes, I pass stop lines against red lights on occasion, though I never enter the junction itself. That's a bit Clintonesque, I suppose, but could be likened to deliberately driving at, say, 33 in a 30 limit. It is a breach of the law but increases danger only very slightly. Advanced stop lines allow cyclists to negotiate junctions more safely without the need to break the law, which is a Good Thing. I have never felt the need to pass the line where an ASL exists. Entering the junction against a red light is very dangerous (and I don't do it). Driving fast enough to trigger a Gatso is sufficient to put you on the upward slope of the famous U-shaped curve. Both these behaviours are associated with measurably increased risk. There is a substantial body of evidence showing that speeding is dangerous, which is why I don't do it any more. I would be interested to see any figures on the danger posed to others by a cyclist stopping ahead of the line at a light controlled junction. Anyone who has such info please email me: guy dot chapman at spamcop dot net. As an aside, I have never seen a cyclist attack another cyclist because they were obeying the law, though I don't discount the possibility that it could happen. I have seen drivers attack cyclists who were behaving lawfully, and I have been the victim of three traffic tantrums caused by my apparently unacceptable habit of driving within the speed limit (and not significantly below it in these cases). --- Guy === Respectable rules for responsible people: http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
the quest for safety
In article , says...
In article , Ian G Batten writes In article , Richard wrote: Is anyone here arguing we should require people to work close to where they live? Yes. If people live closer to their work £285,000 for a studio flat in Canary Wharf. Thus confirming the stupidity of Londoners to pay through the nose for a poxy little bedsit with a crap view. -- ________________________ Conor Turton ICQ:31909763 ________________________ |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
the quest for safety
"Bagpuss" wrote in message
... I just guess Guy is Mr Perfect then. I wouldn't suggest anything of the sort. I am not a particularly skilful driver so I have to work at driving safely and legally. Most of the time I can't be bothered, so I go by bike. -- Guy === WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.com |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
the quest for safety
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
"PeterE" wrote in message He has specifically admitted contravening Rule 55 on a regular basis. Likewise I make no claims to scrupulous adherence to Rule 103. Yes, I pass stop lines against red lights on occasion, though I never enter the junction itself. That's a bit Clintonesque, I suppose, but could be likened to deliberately driving at, say, 33 in a 30 limit. It is a breach of the law but increases danger only very slightly. Advanced stop lines allow cyclists to negotiate junctions more safely without the need to break the law, which is a Good Thing. I have never felt the need to pass the line where an ASL exists. But you are admitting adopting a "contingent" approach to the rules in the HC rather than the absolute one you urge on others. If you think it may, in some circumstances, be OK to exceed the posted speed limit by 10% provided it increases danger only slightly, then fair enough, a refreshing outbreak of common sense on your part. -- http://www.speedlimit.org.uk "If laws are to be respected, they must be worthy of respect." |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
the quest for safety
"Clive" wrote in message
... A few years ago I was done for not obeying fixed signals. My front wheels were about 18 inches over the white line, when I contested in court that I hadn't gone through the junction, I was pointedly asked, "Did my front wheels go over the line", to which I had to answer yes, and was fined £60 and three penalty points for not obeying fixed signals. is this the police being over zealous, or am I mot allowed to do what the police do regularly? You are not allowed to do what the police do. http://www.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#36 (a) subject to sub-paragraph (b) and,(...) the red signal shall convey the prohibition that vehicular traffic shall not proceed beyond the stop line |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
the quest for safety | London Transport | |||
the quest for safety | London Transport | |||
the quest for safety | London Transport | |||
the quest for safety | London Transport |