|
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
In article , says...
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 18:08:40 +0100 Conor wrote: While riding up the inside of a truck is a prety dumb thing to do truckers arn't immune from forgetting to indicate. It was already completely over the white give way line turning into the first exit. when.... what? The cyclist tried to ride past it? Doesn't mean he didn't forget to indicate. Irrelevent. AND If it was going straight on, it would not be required to indicate, You don't have to indicate if going straight ahead?! Wow, who knew. I see you snipped the part about the trailer taking the same path. -- Conor I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Roger Thorpe wrote:
The fact that he boasts about recklessly endangering the lives of others does not make him "open and honest". I've not read him "boast" about it, you'll have to ask him if he thinks that it was a wise thing to do. I think that I know what his answer might be. He quite openly boasted about it here on uk.transport. He seemed to find it very funny, and he had the perfect excuse "everyone does it". I've never seen him utter a word of regret. Reggie and Ronnie Kray liked everyone to know who they had had killed and injured. By your argument above that makes them "open and honest". No it doesn't, because my argument is based on the premise that he regrets that action, Very Christian. However I think that several Emperors had the right attitude to Christian attitudes. And since I've never seen him utter a word of regret and I have seen him boast about his continuing excessive drinking, I don't see any sign of regret on the horizon. but was prepared to confess it. Sadly a couple of trolls here will continue to use it as a stick to beat him. He deserves beating with something bigger than a stick. Can I send a virtual pick-axe handle to his detractors? |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:52:59 +0100, Roger Thorpe
wrote: snip At the moment the group is in a dysfunctional state after the concerted attempts by a couple of trolls to destroy it, I don't thinks that the Taylor and Chapman realise the harm they do - I don't think they do it intentionally. -- "Primary position" the middle of a traffic lane. To take the "primary position" : to ride a bike in the middle of the lane in order to obstruct other road vehicles from overtaking. A term invented by and used by psycholists and not recognised in the Highway Code. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
|
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
In message , Steve Firth
writes I said nothing about attacking anyone, strike up another failure for that walnut-sized cat brain you have. Take that back, I like cats and I'm sure their brain is larger than a walnut, now Marz is a different matter. -- Clive |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:37:43 -0700 (PDT),
francis wrote: On Apr 15, 6:56*pm, Marz wrote: On Apr 15, 11:58*am, (Steve Firth) wrote: Marz wrote: For the avoidance of doubt, that's you that is. No that's not me. I've never demanded anyone get out of my ****ing way. I actually believe peds have the right of way over cyclists at all times. There you go again, because you've already stated that you refuse to cede right of way to pedestrians, even when the red light is telling you to do exactly that. I just don't give a crap if the light is red and that a ped's right of way is defined by the fact my actions will not impede their progress. I see, you feel that you should be the only person to make all the rules. Try it with me and you'll find out that I can make the rules too. And I'm a much nastier ****er than you seem to think you are. What your simple wee mind seems to fail to grasp is that I'm not making new rules, I'm not saying this is how things are supposed to be or even justifying it as ok. It's just what I do and whether you think you can take me or not is immaterial. Whereas you seem to think it is ok and justified to violently attack someone who infringes a traffic law. Ah, another ****wit cyclist who thinks he is above the law. Is he typical or is he the type that give others a bad name? At least two cyclists (ok, one of them is me) have called him an idiot or worse on this thread. Anyone who uses their vehicle in a careless, dangerous or intimidatory manner should be dealt with to the full extent of the law. You make up your own mind. -- Andy Leighton = "The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials" - Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_ |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . Colin Reed wrote: The recent posts from "Marz", who to me at least is a new one, have suggested that he would do more damage to a ped who deliberately shoulder charged him than he would suffer himself. Is this what you refer to as "terrorising pedestrians"? No, I refer to his admission that he barrels through pedestrians on crossings, even ignoring red lights to do so. And that he thinks it quite appropriate to force his way between the pedestrians who have a right to use the crossing when he does not. But it's nice to see the cyclists either (a) closing ranks or (b) refusing to see things from the point of the view of the vulnerable road user. Closing ranks in the way that I wrote "The general attitude and content of Marz's posts about red light jumping at non-busy crossings have already suggested that he may be a bit of an arse, and probably thought of one by many URC regulars. " and then you snipped it from your reply you mean? I think that says far more about how you want cyclists to behave rather than how they/we do. Colin |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 13:28:51 +0100, "Brimstone"
wrote: Adrian wrote: "Brimstone" gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: That may or may not be the case down south. However, in this country the figures I have seen indicated that this was not the case. Umm, you're in the same country I am - and by "down south", I presume you're meaning the portion of that country which houses somewhere more than 90% of the population of the country? Errrr, not if he's in Edinburgh. That's in a different country to where you say you live (somewhere on the outer reaches of the (sadly truncated) Metropolitan Railway IIRC). Funny. I thought both were definitely in the United Kingdom. They are, but Sotland and England are different countries. Scotland fails to meet 6 of the 8 criteria of being a country. http://geography.about.com/od/politicalgeography/a/scotlandnot.htm The clue is in the the fact that they have different names Is of no significance. they can call it "Caledonia" if they like. and different legal structures. Ditto. While laws governing Scotland are passed in England Scotland cannot be a country. Derek |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Clive gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying: I said nothing about attacking anyone, strike up another failure for that walnut-sized cat brain you have. Take that back, I like cats and I'm sure their brain is larger than a walnut, now Marz is a different matter. I have a cat sat on my lap at the moment, preventing me from reaching the laptop easily. Even by cat standards, this gormless fluffbucket is thick as two short planks. However, even it pities Marz. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
In article , francis wrote:
Ah, another ****wit cyclist who thinks he is above the law. Is he typical or is he the type that give others a bad name? He's the type that gives others a bad name. Is being unable to work that out for yourself typical of uk.transport crossposters, or are you giving the others a bad name? :-) |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
JNugent writes:
In any given case, whose job is it to judge the acceptable value for "too close to be stopped safely"? A list of people whose job it is to judge things can probably be had by contacting the various courts aroud the country. They're called "judges", appropriately enough. -dan |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 21:25:02 +0100
Conor wrote: when.... what? The cyclist tried to ride past it? Doesn't mean he didn't forget to indicate. Irrelevent. Err , yes , very relevant. Dumb cyclist riding up inside of truck + dumb trucker not indicating = trouble. AND If it was going straight on, it would not be required to indicate, You don't have to indicate if going straight ahead?! Wow, who knew. I see you snipped the part about the trailer taking the same path. You mean if an artic goes in a straight line the trailer will too?? My god, these revelations just never stop, I need to go sit down... B2003 |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Daniel Barlow wrote:
JNugent writes: [ law regarding amber traffic lights:] In any given case, whose job is it to judge the acceptable value for "too close to be stopped safely"? A list of people whose job it is to judge things can probably be had by contacting the various courts aroud the country. They're called "judges", appropriately enough. Post-hoc, you mean? I'll assume you are not using that response as a way of admitting that you don't know. How does the opinion of a judge, months later and in receipt of second-hand information, help the driver or cyclist who is approaching and nearly at a set of traffic lights which have just, this very fraction of a second, turned amber? Is it *supposed* to be a guessing game, or are there some rules which you think can be consulted? |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Graculus wrote:
Boris's latest mad-cap idea: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7998687.stm and other sources. So, the idea is that this allows cyclists to move off before lorries and thus not get trapped/killed when they move off and turn left. And it is cited that 13 deaths occurred because of this. What they fail to say is how many cyclists would be killed when they see the red light as a proverbial "green light" to run the red without paying any attention to what's approaching from their right and get subsequently hit by some other vehicle crossing the junction on green. I'm sure they would be meant to give way, blah blah blah, but would that happen in reality? Quite barmy! Yesterday I approached, on my bike, a junction that had both an approach lane and an Advanced Stop Box. The lights were RED. There was a cyclist in the box, but the first vehicle was a van indicating left. Both myself and another cyclists waited to the rear of the first vehicle. (We we aware that the first vehicle in a Q at lights normally just looks at the light and moves off when they change without looking around). Another van was pulled up along side us. When the lights changed we all moved off. As we reached the junction the van that had been alongside STARTED to indicate left and pulled across our paths. It seems increasingly common for vehicles to use 'indicators' NOT to indicate what they will be doing, but only to indicate WHEN they are doing the manouvre, as if it isn't bloody obvious. {end of preamble} What we really really need are 'advance' cycle lights such as used in other Northern European Countries. Then cyclists could approach lights in the provided cycle lanes in the sure knowledge that they wouldn't be trapped by a left turning vehicle as the vehicle lights turned green for motor vehicles. Of course they would still be the odd idiot who would cycle up the inside of a vehicle indicating left AFTER the advance cycle lights have turned green, but in the vast majority of case cyclists would be safer, and it would even be possible for alert cyclists to use an approach lane on the left to correctly position themselves for a right turn at most junctions. Jim Chisholm |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:51:23 +0100 someone who may be Derek
wrote this:- While laws governing Scotland are passed in England Scotland cannot be a country. Laws governing Greenland are passed in Denmark. The same used to be true of Iceland. If, for the sake of argument, one accepts the claim that the UK is a country then by the argument above it cannot be a country. While laws governing the UK are passed in Belgium the UK cannot be a country. -- 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 |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
JNugent writes:
Daniel Barlow wrote: JNugent writes: [ law regarding amber traffic lights:] In any given case, whose job is it to judge the acceptable value for "too close to be stopped safely"? A list of people whose job it is to judge things can probably be had by contacting the various courts aroud the country. They're called "judges", appropriately enough. Post-hoc, you mean? It is inherent in the scheme of things that road traffic offences are judged after they have been committed (or alleged to have been committed), yes. I think that to do otherwise would be an unacceptable infringement of civil liberties. How does the opinion of a judge, months later and in receipt of second-hand information, help the driver or cyclist who is approaching and nearly at a set of traffic lights which have just, this very fraction of a second, turned amber? It doesn't, but that's not what you were appearing to ask. If a driver wishes to avoid committing the offence in the first place and needs advice on whether he can safely stop at a set of traffic lights which has just turned amber, he may have recourse to (a) his own knowledge of his vehicle an the road conditions, (b) the guide to stopping distances printed on the back of the Highway Code, (c) the services of such organisations as the BSM, the AA, and numerous independent driving instructors, any of which would I am sure be happy to give him a remedial course in driving skills. -dan |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
|
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
"J. Chisholm" wrote in message ... It seems increasingly common for vehicles to use 'indicators' NOT to indicate what they will be doing, but only to indicate WHEN they are doing the manouvre, as if it isn't bloody obvious. {end of preamble} That is because many drivers will combine the act of turning the wheel, with the act of flicking the indicator stem :-( |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
David Hansen gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying: If, for the sake of argument, one accepts the claim that the UK is a country then by the argument above it cannot be a country. While laws governing the UK are passed in Belgium the UK cannot be a country. Just as well they aren't, eh? EU directives are approved and passed into UK law by Westminster. Yes, UK law. England, Wales, NI _and_ Scotland. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Adrian wrote:
I have a cat sat on my lap at the moment, preventing me from reaching the laptop easily. Even by cat standards, this gormless fluffbucket is thick as two short planks. When did you get hold of my cat? |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
David Hansen wrote:
While laws governing the UK are passed in Belgium the UK cannot be a country. Perhaps you would like to explain which laws passed in Belgium govern the UK? tumbleweed |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 09:59:17 +0100
David Hansen wrote: On Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:51:23 +0100 someone who may be Derek wrote this:- While laws governing Scotland are passed in England Scotland cannot be a country. Laws governing Greenland are passed in Denmark. The same used to be true of Iceland. If, for the sake of argument, one accepts the claim that the UK is a country then by the argument above it cannot be a country. While laws governing the UK are passed in Belgium the UK cannot be a country. Scotland is a country, wales and NI are provinces. Scotland had its own monarchy until james wandered south in the 17th century and its own self governing parliament up until the 18th century. Wales was never anything more than an area of tribal feifdoms living around some mountains who happened to speak the same language. Even their so called princes never controlled the whole region and since the 13th century its effectively been part of england anyway. Ireland like wales was just a mishmash of tribes and could never really be called a country other than by definition of its coastline. B2003 |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
(Steve Firth) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying: I have a cat sat on my lap at the moment, preventing me from reaching the laptop easily. Even by cat standards, this gormless fluffbucket is thick as two short planks. When did you get hold of my cat? Careful, you'll fuel Toomtard's "Steve Firth Collective" fantasies. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Adrian wrote:
David Hansen gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: If, for the sake of argument, one accepts the claim that the UK is a country then by the argument above it cannot be a country. While laws governing the UK are passed in Belgium the UK cannot be a country. Just as well they aren't, eh? Tssk, eh? Hansen not understanding the political constitution of the EU. Yet on previous occasions he has claimed to be a political advisor and lobbyist to the European Parliament on transport and environmental issues. One would think that such an important individual would have bothered to acquaint himself with the legal relationship of the EU to the UK constitution before attempting to tell the Eurocrats how to manage transport and the environment. EU directives are approved and passed into UK law by Westminster. Yes, UK law. England, Wales, NI _and_ Scotland. Yebbut "it's Oor Oil!" Actually we've just about used it all up, so Scotland can have the empty tin back. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Adrian wrote:
Careful, you'll fuel Toomtard's "Steve Firth Collective" fantasies. I did note that the drooling retard who wasn't going to post here again has in fact posted yet another incoherent, rambling load of old ********. It was posted not long after lunchtime opening, presumably via a WiFi point in the local Wetherspoons. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
"J. Chisholm" gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying: Yesterday I approached, on my bike, a junction that had both an approach lane and an Advanced Stop Box. The lights were RED. There was a cyclist in the box, but the first vehicle was a van indicating left. Both myself and another cyclists waited to the rear of the first vehicle. (We we aware that the first vehicle in a Q at lights normally just looks at the light and moves off when they change without looking around). Another van was pulled up along side us. When the lights changed we all moved off. As we reached the junction the van that had been alongside STARTED to indicate left and pulled across our paths. I don't think anybody's ever claimed that there aren't a substantial number of ****wits driving on the roads of this country. If it's not a silly question, why did you stop in a position where he could pull up alongside? |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
(Steve Firth) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying: If, for the sake of argument, one accepts the claim that the UK is a country then by the argument above it cannot be a country. While laws governing the UK are passed in Belgium the UK cannot be a country. Just as well they aren't, eh? Tssk, eh? Hansen not understanding the political constitution of the EU. Yet on previous occasions he has claimed to be a political advisor and lobbyist to the European Parliament on transport and environmental issues. One would think that such an important individual would have bothered to acquaint himself with the legal relationship of the EU to the UK constitution before attempting to tell the Eurocrats how to manage transport and the environment. Still. At least he can sit there and look at his Scottish passport to remind himself that Scotland is a country. Oh, wait a minute. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Adrian wrote:
[Hansen] Still. At least he can sit there and look at his Scottish passport to remind himself that Scotland is a country. Oh, wait a minute. Look on the good side, he'd have to get through passport control in order to enter England. Oh, wait a minute. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Adrian wrote:
If it's not a silly question, why did you stop in a position where he could pull up alongside? Because had I stopped outside the cycle lane I would have risked being hit or abused by one of those many drivers who believe if there is a cycle lane I should be in it! Jim |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
(Steve Firth) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying: Still. At least he can sit there and look at his Scottish passport to remind himself that Scotland is a country. Oh, wait a minute. Look on the good side, he'd have to get through passport control in order to enter England. Oh, wait a minute. I should never have let my wall fall into disuse. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Adrian wrote:
(Steve Firth) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: Still. At least he can sit there and look at his Scottish passport to remind himself that Scotland is a country. Oh, wait a minute. Look on the good side, he'd have to get through passport control in order to enter England. Oh, wait a minute. I should never have let my wall fall into disuse. If you hadn't done a runner it would have been maintained. It's all your fault!! |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . Adrian wrote: Careful, you'll fuel Toomtard's "Steve Firth Collective" fantasies. snip shaite As I keep saying but it appears NOT to sink in Gizmo = Filth Also i asked the question about all the new posters that appearedfor just a day or so appeared also to know ALL about Doug, his history with Brians accusations and Filths vomit and would soon disappear after slating Doug DO YOU Adrian think -its really one person = one name=one poster here? If its yes then Mr Adrain Gullible must stop handing your dosh over to all those Nigerian solicitors and money launderers |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
"Steve Firth" wrote in message . .. Ah, OK. *******s. I do find it mildly amusing that cyclists whine on (and on and on) about *their* safety but are such aggressive ****s when it comes to their interaction with pedestrians. Good Point OK which one of you tw4ts is pretending to be Filth today ;-) |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . David Hansen wrote: While laws governing the UK are passed in Belgium the UK cannot be a country. Perhaps you would like to explain which laws passed in Belgium govern the UK? tumbleweed clue for filth - Brussels is in Belgium |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
"Ttoommy" gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying: As I keep saying but it appears NOT to sink in Gizmo = Filth And as the rest of us keep saying - you're a cretin. DO YOU Adrian think -its really one person = one name=one poster here? Certainly not whilst you morph merrily. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
In ,
Adrian tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us: If it's not a silly question, why did you stop in a position where he could pull up alongside? Because preventing a vehicle from overtaking is something one should never ever do ;-) -- Dave Larrington http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk Ernesto, give me that Kit-Kat, or I will kill you. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Adrian wrote:
(Steve Firth) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: Still. At least he can sit there and look at his Scottish passport to remind himself that Scotland is a country. Oh, wait a minute. Look on the good side, he'd have to get through passport control in order to enter England. Oh, wait a minute. I should never have let my wall fall into disuse. When I was at Wallsend it seemed to fall into desea. |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Ttoommy wrote:
As I keep saying but it appears NOT to sink in Gizmo = Filth You can say it as often as you like, it's ********. Oh hang on you'll keep saying it often because it *is* ******** and you only do ********. You have a strange interpretation of not posting here, don't you Toomtard? Or is it just that you're a habitual, deranged and presumably drunken liar? |
Cyclists allowed to run red lights?
Ttoommy wrote:
"Steve Firth" wrote in message .. . David Hansen wrote: While laws governing the UK are passed in Belgium the UK cannot be a country. Perhaps you would like to explain which laws passed in Belgium govern the UK? tumbleweed clue for filth - Brussels is in Belgium You ****ing retard. (a) Where is Strasbourg? (b) Which "laws" passed in Brussels, Strasbourg or Belgium govern the UK? Here's a clue for the answer to (b). None. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 01:56 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk