Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't want to see anyone breaking the law. I hate to see

> drivers OR cyclists saying 'boo hoo, you should be

> hassling someone else'.


> Everyone obeys the law = everyone is safer.


I agree but you have to have realistic expectations. You wouldn't expect the same amount of Police resource to go on bringing teenage shoplifters to justice as it does on serial killers. It's all very well getting grumpy over a cyclist jumping reds but statistically they just don't pose much of a threat to anyone but ocasionally themselves. I mean really... I think stats above indicated a whopping TEN fatalities over FOUR YEARS.


As tragic as those ten fatalities were, as a pedestrian you're 263 times more likely to be killed by a motor vehicle than by a bicycle:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090126/text/90126w0003.htm#09012627000041


However riled it gets you Loz it just isn't as big of an issue.

I think the families of those ten people would take issue with that. Are you arguing that cyclists who break the rules of the road are somehow less reprehensible because they are not as likely to kill someone doing so? Anyone that thinks they are not subject to the highway code shouldn't be on the road...be they vehicle driver or cyclist.

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think the families of those ten people would

> take issue with that.


With what?


Are you arguing that

> cyclists who break the rules of the road are

> somehow less reprehensible because they are not as

> likely to kill someone doing so?


No.


Anyone that

> thinks they are not subject to the highway code

> shouldn't be on the road...be they vehicle driver

> or cyclist.


Agree.


Think you have misunderstood. I was saying that although ten pedestrian fatalities have been caused by cyclists, in the same time frame many many more have been caused by motorists. Lets think of their families?

Loz Wrote:


> I'd be more than happy with that. I don't want to

> see anyone breaking the law. I hate to see

> drivers OR cyclists saying 'boo hoo, you should be

> hassling someone else'.


Well as this is a thread is about a little girl who was hit by a car whose driver was by some accounts driving recklessly it would be good if you took your own advice.

henryb Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz Wrote:

>

> > I'd be more than happy with that. I don't want to

> > see anyone breaking the law. I hate to see

> > drivers OR cyclists saying 'boo hoo, you should be

> > hassling someone else'.

>

> Well as this is a thread is about a little girl

> who was hit by a car whose driver was by some

> accounts driving recklessly it would be good if

> you took your own advice.


One account. And a rather dubious one with an obvious agenda at that.


So henryb, do you believe that all road users should obey the law or not? Or is it 'boo hoo, you should be hassling someone else'?

You wouldn't expect the same amount of Police resource to go on bringing teenage shoplifters to justice as it does on serial killers.


As a lot of police metrics is on clear-up rates - getting one teenager to 'cough' to loads of shoplifting offences can count a lot more than just lifting a serial killer who's probably only committed 5-10 offences. Additionally most of the hard work in terms of observation, initial 'arrest' and evidence handling is done by store detectives - so I would quite expect the modern day police force to be very happy to put resource into charging teenage shoplifters, particularly where they can hope for a wedge of TICs to go with that. Equally road-traffic offences are a nice little 'metric' earner when it comes down to it.

Sorry Penguin I meant more resource per criminal not overall. So you wouldn't expect forensics teams, sniffer dogs and psychological profilers to be resourced because Dave nicked a DVD from the market. Anyway it was a poor example and didnt really illustrate my point very well


...which was that until cyclists start causing a lot more pedestrian deaths (or drivers stop causing as many) you won't see the same level of resource because although the impact is the same in the case of a fatality, there are just far far far fewer fatalities caused by cyclists.


In the same vein, the spot where this little girl got hit probably won't get any attention until accidents there start causing injury/death or many more incidents are reported to the Police. James Barber said as much re the junctions at Underhill/Barry and Upland/Barry. Statistically there just aren't seen as dangerous enough to warrant resource over other junctions in the area.

binary_star Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ...which was that until cyclists start causing a lot more pedestrian deaths (or drivers stop

> causing as many) you won't see the same level of resource because although the impact is the same

> in the case of a fatality, there are just far far far fewer fatalities caused by cyclists.


I'm not arguing for the same level of police resource - not even near it. I'm saying that cyclists should stop asking for the law to not apply to them until the day that all drivers are 110% law abiding. Is asking for the rules to apply to everyone too much to ask for? Henryb was almost there until I rather surprised him by agreeing with him.

All the ones that, every time you mention cyclists obeying the law, they jump in and say 'but whatabout all the terrible car drivers'. See threads passim on EDF. Have to say, you're generally not one of them.


Stamp out bad driving AND bad cycling. Who could argue? Who indeed.

Penguin68 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You wouldn't expect the same amount of Police

> resource to go on bringing teenage shoplifters to

> justice as it does on serial killers.

>

> As a lot of police metrics is on clear-up rates -

> getting one teenager to 'cough' to loads of

> shoplifting offences can count a lot more than

> just lifting a serial killer who's probably only

> committed 5-10 offences. Additionally most of the

> hard work in terms of observation, initial

> 'arrest' and evidence handling is done by store

> detectives - so I would quite expect the modern

> day police force to be very happy to put resource

> into charging teenage shoplifters

x x x x x

what about teenage serial killers?! Traffic laws/highway code applies to ALL road users. End of.

I personally don't know anyone who thinks the law shouldn't apply to them and I don't infer that from any comments on the EDF either. But the law already DOES apply to everyone we don't have to campaign for it to. So what is the issue?

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Fantastic - another convert to visible

> registration for cyclists, perhaps?


Yeh sure I'm already insured, registration, why not? Although the cost of running such a scheme likely makes it a prohibitive factor in introducing it. Which is why the Swiss got rid of it.


It wouldn't really work in the UK though:

http://ipayroadtax.com/licensed-to-cycle/licensed-to-cycle/

Wow: Imagine cyclists wizzing along at 30+ never letting others cross, crashing, taking out road furniture at the expense of us all.


Today I cycled to the Imperial War Museum area and then to the 205 at Belair Park. 1 1/2 hours transit round trip (exercise) to 7 1/2 hours of activity in 2 locations passing cars queued in all directions coming and going. I had a great Sunday. Whoever crashed their car had a cr*p Sunday. No crashed cycles to be seen anywhere.

WOW. Imagine vehicles jumping red lights by the dozen, driving at night with no lights, weaving in and out of stationary cyclists without looking................


Today I went to a car boot sale in Hayes.....drove there in no time at all and took only slightly longer to get home. I had a great Sunday too :)

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This incessant, drivers bad, cyclists good debate.


In many cases these are one in the same. People don't become raging murderous lunatics once they get behind the wheel of a car. Just far far more likely to kill someone. It's not the person it's the vehicle.

DJKillaQueen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> WOW. Imagine vehicles jumping red lights by the

> dozen, driving at night with no lights, weaving in

> and out of stationary cyclists without

> looking................

>


Wow. Stereotype, much?

Loz Wrote:

--------------------------------------------------

> I'm saying that cyclists should stop asking for the law to not apply to them


binary_star Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Who are these people?


Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> All the ones that, every time you mention cyclists obeying the law, they jump in and say 'but whatabout all the terrible car drivers'.


Except, in this instance, the issue was that a little girl had been knocked down by a car. But it turned into a thread about how dangerous cyclists are and a call for bicycle registration. Huh.

Car drivers on here seem to get defensive and try to deflect critic onto cyclists whenever there is anything that might put them in a negative light.


It seems pointless trying to pierce their defensive armour with logical arguments as their inability to look at the harm their addiction to car causes them to be blind to criticism resulting in circular, repetitive and pointless arguments.


Typical of all most addicts really.

Cyclists on here seem to get defensive and try to deflect critic onto motorists whenever there is anything that might put them in a negative light.


It seems pointless trying to pierce their defensive armour with logical arguments as their inability to look at the harm their addiction to cycle causes them to be blind to criticism resulting in circular, repetitive and pointless arguments.


Typical of all most addicts really.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
    • Aria is my go to plumber. Fixed a toilet leak for me at short notice. Reasonably priced and very professional. 
    • Anyone has a storage or a display rack for Albums LPs drop me a message thanks
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...