Cyclists taking over paths!!

[Rockets]

11 hours ago, Hen123 said:

I believe originally they were introduced for simple registration purposes as criminals were using cars to escape crime scenes rather than any specific road safety concerns. 

Again - nonsense.

 

Then you win trope bingo by throwing the right-wing bigot accusation - my, that was so predictable. It's almost as if you are trying to highlight the problems having a rational discussion with some people on this issue is. You can start to see where the cult of cycling trope manifests itself from....

 

Bottom line is that if London is to achieve it's stated goal within Vision Zero to eliminate all road deaths and injuries by 2041 you cannot turn a blind-eye to one section of road users on the basis of "they don't kill or injure as many people as other road users". That's blinkered, self-serving and naïve in the extreme. 

 

Hilda Griffiths was killed by a cyclist racing around Regent's Park who was cycling at dangerous speeds and his defence in court (which was successful) was "the speed limit does not apply to cyclists". That cannot be considered to be reasonable.

 

Interestingly, I read there was another incident involving cyclist and a dog walker at the same spot and this is what is prompting the Royal Parks to take action against cyclists: https://www.royalparks.org.uk/get-in-touch/media-centre/news-press-releases/regents-park-statement-royal-parks

 

Most telling is their detailed statement where they remind cyclists that pedestrians have priority - something a large number of cyclists seem to have forgotten, or ignore, all across London.

Safety for all our visitors and road users is our priority. While we welcome considerate cyclists, pedestrians have priority within the Royal Parks, as they make up the majority of park visitors. 

 

[malumbu]

2 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

When my daughter reported a road rage attack in progress on 999 (a car driver slamming into a cyclist who had annoyed him, 3 times pinning him and his bike to a parked car, totalling his bike and injuring him (attack with a deadly weapon - a car - actual bodily harm and criminal damage) - in Forest Hill Road they were not interested enough to attend - following up a couple of weeks later with a form. But perhaps that's just them being even-handed - after all in their minds it was probably just another trivial violation of the Highway code. They might have come out if my daughter had said they cyclist was lying unconscious or dying, but he was just walking wounded, as so many pedestrians are who are hit by cyclists on pavements. 

Wow, you are effectively saying that cyclists deserve being attacked by drivers because, they are, cyclists.  Slippery slope to populism.  I've not even heard Farage say this.  Well not yet 

[Rockets]

1 hour ago, malumbu said:

Wow, you are effectively saying that cyclists deserve being attacked by drivers because, they are, cyclists.  Slippery slope to populism.  I've not even heard Farage say this.  Well not yet 

Malumbu, even for you this is stretching interpretive skills to the absolute limit...how you came to that conclusion is really a complete mystery.

[ed_pete]

This is interesting.  It's a list of all reported incidents from minor or fatal and on page 7 includes the modes of transport of the person causing the accident and the person (or persons) to whom the accident happened.

Microsoft Power BI

So for example, in Southwark in 2023, there were 191 reported casualties to pedestrians of which 26 we caused by pedal cycles.  Of the 26, 14 were serious and 12 were slight (you get this using the filters on the black buttons).

Then there were 348 reported casualties to cyclists, 281 slight, 66 serious and 1 fatal.

Lots to play with.

 

Edited June 24 by ed_pete

[Penguin68]

2 hours ago, malumbu said:

Wow, you are effectively saying that cyclists deserve being attacked by drivers because, they are, cyclists.  Slippery slope to populism.  I've not even heard Farage say this.  Well not yet 

What I was effectively saying is that the police are pants, at least locally - I certainly wasn't attacking the cyclist in question, the clear victim of a road rage attack, but I was, perhaps, suggesting that one man's 'trivial violation of the Highway code' might be another's horror story. But clearly any attack on anyone by your book is an attack on cyclists, even when it isn't!

[Hen123]

11 hours ago, Spartacus said:

Therein lies the problem, cyclist think that when they break the rules it is a trivial violation of the highway code. 

Nearly all car drivers think that which is why there are so many deaths on the roads. The Police and Govt laws focus their attention on the people who cause the most harm. That seems a sensible approach to me. 

10 hours ago, Rockets said:

Again - nonsense.

 

Then you win trope bingo by throwing the right-wing bigot accusation - my, that was so predictable. It's almost as if you are trying to highlight the problems having a rational discussion with some people on this issue is. You can start to see where the cult of cycling trope manifests itself from....

 

Bottom line is that if London is to achieve it's stated goal within Vision Zero to eliminate all road deaths and injuries by 2041 you cannot turn a blind-eye to one section of road users on the basis of "they don't kill or injure as many people as other road users". That's blinkered, self-serving and naïve in the extreme. 

 

Hilda Griffiths was killed by a cyclist racing around Regent's Park who was cycling at dangerous speeds and his defence in court (which was successful) was "the speed limit does not apply to cyclists". That cannot be considered to be reasonable.

 

Interestingly, I read there was another incident involving cyclist and a dog walker at the same spot and this is what is prompting the Royal Parks to take action against cyclists: https://www.royalparks.org.uk/get-in-touch/media-centre/news-press-releases/regents-park-statement-royal-parks

 

Most telling is their detailed statement where they remind cyclists that pedestrians have priority - something a large number of cyclists seem to have forgotten, or ignore, all across London.

Safety for all our visitors and road users is our priority. While we welcome considerate cyclists, pedestrians have priority within the Royal Parks, as they make up the majority of park visitors. 

 

If you go there you will find most car drivers breaking the speed limit. Why do car drivers think they are above the law?

7 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

What I was effectively saying is that the police are pants, at least locally - I certainly wasn't attacking the cyclist in question, the clear victim of a road rage attack, but I was, perhaps, suggesting that one man's 'trivial violation of the Highway code' might be another's horror story. But clearly any attack on anyone by your book is an attack on cyclists, even when it isn't!

You think they are pants. But that is because your bigotry and hatred towards one particular group of road users has blinded you to any sense of reason or perspective. That is why you get so upset when people point it out. Personally I think the police get it about right.  

Edited June 24 by Hen123

[Rockets]

7 hours ago, ed_pete said:

So for example, in Southwark in 2023, there were 191 reported casualties to pedestrians of which 26 we caused by pedal cycles.  Of the 26, 14 were serious and 12 were slight (you get this using the filters on the black buttons).

This is actually a lot higher than I would have expected and I think shows there is a serious problem that needs addressing. Given of the 26 that 14 were classed as serious should be a big concern to everyone. You also wonder how many go unreported due to the lack of need for insurance for cyclists.

Shocking stats for the head in the sane brigade....extrapolate that across London and it probably shows the extent of the problem.

[malumbu]

26 accidents caused by cyclists?  It's not caused by, but involving, cyclists.  No doubt pedestrians crossing the road without looking is the main cause.  How much speeding illegal ebikes, with poorly trained riders contribute, is open to speculation.

In the good old days of Lounge discussions on this issue, much less patrtisan, I had some good data that as a pedestrian you are far more likely to be harmed by a car mounting the pavement than a bike on the pavement.  I'll see if I can dig out something more recent.

[Rockets]

24 minutes ago, Hen123 said:

Nearly all car drivers think that which is why there are so many deaths on the roads. The Police and Govt laws focus their attention on the people who cause the most harm. That seems a sensible approach to me. 

So you must agree then that the action taken by the Royal Parks to restrict Strava use as part of attempts to limit the amount of cycle time trialing through the parks is a good thing then? 

16 minutes ago, malumbu said:

26 accidents caused by cyclists?  It's not caused by, but involving, cyclists. 

Yes the injury to the pedestrian was caused by the cyclist.

Ha ha, are you applying the same "involving" to accidents caused by cars...you can't pick and choose how you categorise things you know....

20 minutes ago, malumbu said:

How much speeding illegal ebikes, with poorly trained riders contribute, is open to speculation.

So are these not cyclists then, perhaps they come under the powered two-wheeler category? Or are you suggesting we should have cyclist subsets to help your narrative to defend your position?

[alice]

accusations of hatred and bigotry have become quite popular when logical argument fails

[Hen123]

30 minutes ago, Rockets said:

So you must agree then that the action taken by the Royal Parks to restrict Strava use as part of attempts to limit the amount of cycle time trialing through the parks is a good thing then? 

Yes the injury to the pedestrian was caused by the cyclist.

Ha ha, are you applying the same "involving" to accidents caused by cars...you can't pick and choose how you categorise things you know....

So are these not cyclists then, perhaps they come under the powered two-wheeler category? Or are you suggesting we should have cyclist subsets to help your narrative to defend your position?

You didn’t answer my question. Why do nearly all car drivers think they are above the law? The fact that you find it funny that car drivers kill so many people including children - makes it clear where your mind is and what kind of person you are. 

11 minutes ago, alice said:

accusations of hatred and bigotry have become quite popular when logical argument fails

And that is often the excuse people whose views are driven by bigotry and hatred say when it gets pointed out. 

[malumbu]

A conversation five years ago covering similar issues which was much more civilised.  Perhaps something to reflect on.  Many of us posting on the current thread contributed to the earlier one.  Worth a read in any case.

[Rockets]

8 hours ago, Hen123 said:

You didn’t answer my question. Why do nearly all car drivers think they are above the law?

I don't think they do as they are acutely aware of the measures taken against them to police them from doing so.

 

8 hours ago, Hen123 said:

The fact that you find it funny that car drivers kill so many people including children - makes it clear where your mind is and what kind of person you are. 

I am laughing at the way some on your side of the argument manipulate the narrative to try and suit their own myopic agenda and then demonise and name call anyone who dares challenge your way of thinking.

Which you just did perfectly. Thank you.

Keep it up, you're doing your side of the argument the world of good and are showing what a rational, thoughtful and considered bunch of folks you are! 😉

There is a growing problem with inconsiderate and dangerous cycling that is putting pedestrians at risk and those stats on cycle injuries caused by bikes in Southwark is truly shocking and something needs to be done urgently.

[ed_pete]

11 hours ago, Rockets said:

This is actually a lot higher than I would have expected and I think shows there is a serious problem that needs addressing. Given of the 26 that 14 were classed as serious should be a big concern to everyone. You also wonder how many go unreported due to the lack of need for insurance for cyclists.

Shocking stats for the head in the sane brigade....extrapolate that across London and it probably shows the extent of the problem.

Don't assume or start saying that the cyclists (or any other modes of transport) were at fault.  The text says that involvement does not imply fault.  

[Hen123]

15 hours ago, Rockets said:

I don't think they do as they are acutely aware of the measures taken against them to police them from doing so.

 

I am laughing at the way some on your side of the argument manipulate the narrative to try and suit their own myopic agenda and then demonise and name call anyone who dares challenge your way of thinking.

Which you just did perfectly. Thank you.

Keep it up, you're doing your side of the argument the world of good and are showing what a rational, thoughtful and considered bunch of folks you are! 😉

There is a growing problem with inconsiderate and dangerous cycling that is putting pedestrians at risk and those stats on cycle injuries caused by bikes in Southwark is truly shocking and something needs to be done urgently.

You have called people who don’t agree with your vicious, bigoted,  hate driven agenda - a cult, myopic, demonising. Get away. Look in a mirror. 

[Spartacus]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C706onctOk-/?igsh=MXBsYTg2YzZrc2ppNg==

We need road safety adverts like this for all road users including cyclists on pavements 🤣

[Rockets]

Hen123 you're at it again...

You have an incredibly myopic agenda (not quite a one-topic poster but close) and then hurl childish playground abuse when your argument runs aground and flounders. It is an oh so familiar path taken by so many on the pro-cycle/pro-LTN lobby - taking us back to some dearly departed friends like LTNManatee and BooHoo. It's why cyclists have such an awful reputation at the moment and are widely disliked - and some cyclists are tarring the good ones (like me ;-)) with their brush. Some of us do think and care about other road users and don't believe that cycling is the be all and end all and are capable of respecting the rules of the road. Perhaps a few more needs to take leaves out of our books.

 

Clearly injuries to pedestrians caused by cycles is a problem yet you try and have a sensible discussion with people and all they can parrott is: well cars kill and injure more than bikes and then call you a bigot because you dare to take a position that they don't agree with. That is an approach that will not help us get to Vision Zero will it  and Vision Zero apllies to all road users - unless cyclists get an exemption and I am sure there are some on here who would lobby for that.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 25 by Rockets

[malumbu]

It's about perspective and proportionality.  I expect more people are injured each year due to horses on our roads or cattle.  But there isn't some campaign to ban them. 

So cycling on pavements is antisocial and can cause harm.  Yes, I am sure that more can be done.  And perhaps more should be done.  But it doesn't deserve this level of vociferous reaction from a small number of people on this thread.   

Cycling has many many benefits.  The more cyclists on the road, the less car journeys.  As with everything there are downsides, but the benefits far outweigh these. 

[Rockets]

But none of us are having to battle horses using the pavement, being close passed by horses whilst we walk along the pavement or see horses ignoring traffic signals are we? And given 26 people were injured by bikes in Southwark last year alone I can't imagine more people are injured by horses or cows....I think you're clutching a bit with that one....

 

As someone who spends a lot of time in and around Dulwich (on foot) and in London (on my bike and on foot) I can tell you that my perspective is that there is a growing proportion of cyclists who cycle in a manner that puts themselves and other road users at risk.

Cycling does have benefits but it has an increasingly bad reputation because of the behaviour of many cyclists who seem to have a selfishness normally levelled at car drivers.

On the day that London rose to the world's third most congested city and other research confirmed that cycling is still under 5% of all daily journeys in London (whilst walking is around 40%) you have to question whether the cycling only focus of so many in TFL and Labour has been misguided.

Edited June 25 by Rockets

[Spartacus]

@Hen123 @malumbu let's be frank here 

We all agree that all road users should obey the rules, and those who don't should be prosecuted.  Yet constantly you both seem to mutter under your breath that cyclusts are a special category and motorised vehicles are the sole causes of accidents (with the exception of rogue cavalry horses of course) 

Vehicles, proportionally are more numerous and cover more miles than cyclists so yes, proportionally they will be involved in more accidents, but that doesn't mean cyclist should be above the law now does it? 

So how would you both ensure all road users obey ALL the rules 🤔 

And hen, stop banging you special   drum about 95% of car drivers breaking the law, we've got your point but not once have you said how you would enforce the law for all road users, vehicles and cyclists alike. 

 

Edited June 25 by Spartacus

[Hen123]

11 minutes ago, Rockets said:

But none of us are having to battle horses using the pavement, being close passed by horses whilst we walk along the pavement or see horses ignoring traffic signals are we? And given 26 people were injured by bikes in Southwark last year alone I can't imagine more people are injured by horses or cows....I think you're clutching a bit with that one....

 

As someone who spends a lot of time in and around Dulwich (on foot) and in London (on my bike and on foot) I can tell you that my perspective is that there is a growing proportion of cyclists who cycle in a manner that puts themselves and other road users at risk.

Cycling does have benefits but it has an increasingly bad reputation because of the behaviour of many cyclists who seem to have a selfishness normally levelled at car drivers.

On the day that London rose to the world's third most congested city and other research confirmed that cycling is still under 5% of all daily journeys in London (whilst walking is around 40%) you have to question whether the cycling only focus of so many in TFL and Labour has been misguided.

FFS I will happily spend an hour with you walking around East Dulwich so you can show me these Lycra terrorists marauding it’s pavements. 

[Rockets]

Just go and stand outside Dulwich Library for 10 minutes tomorrow around school drop or pick up and watch the flying cargo bikes as they cut corners, ignore red lights and fly along the pavements. Then go and walk around Dulwich Square on Sunday for the full kit wally flying down Calton Road stopping for no-one experience....because every ounce of weight is vital and aerodynamics are essential to Sunday hobbyists cyclists it's not only the leg hair that is gone but also the bell so the only warning you get is the sound of a load gear train as they chicane in front of the cheese shop.

Let me know how you get on and if you see any bad cycling.

And then when you have finished there, get on the train at North Dulwich to London Bridge then walk to Bank. Stand and marvel about how bad the cycling is there (no coincidence that this is where the City of London Police target cyclists with their fines and warnings). In fact go to any road junction in central London and just watch how many cyclists ignore red lights, use pavements to shortcut light phases.

For your final treat go and walk around Regents Park and play chicken with the full kit wally peletons hellbent on shaving a nanosecond off their Strava lap time (oh sorry they can't anymore after Strava was encouraged to remove the Regent's Park lap)

Or.maybe just watch Barbyonabike's latest video of bad cycling in our area posted just 4 days ago (some great ones of the DV junction around 3.25)....some classics in this installment...the camera never lies...

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-VpL34TSY4c&pp=ygUMQmFyYnlvbmFiaWtl

Edited June 25 by Rockets

[ed_pete]

14 hours ago, Rockets said:

Just go and stand outside Dulwich Library for 10 minutes tomorrow around school drop or pick up and watch the flying cargo bikes as they cut corners, ignore red lights and fly along the pavements. Then go and walk around Dulwich Square on Sunday for the full kit wally flying down Calton Road stopping for no-one experience....because every ounce of weight is vital and aerodynamics are essential to Sunday hobbyists cyclists it's not only the leg hair that is gone but also the bell so the only warning you get is the sound of a load gear train as they chicane in front of the cheese shop.

Let me know how you get on and if you see any bad cycling.

And then when you have finished there, get on the train at North Dulwich to London Bridge then walk to Bank. Stand and marvel about how bad the cycling is there (no coincidence that this is where the City of London Police target cyclists with their fines and warnings). In fact go to any road junction in central London and just watch how many cyclists ignore red lights, use pavements to shortcut light phases.

For your final treat go and walk around Regents Park and play chicken with the full kit wally peletons hellbent on shaving a nanosecond off their Strava lap time (oh sorry they can't anymore after Strava was encouraged to remove the Regent's Park lap)

Or.maybe just watch Barbyonabike's latest video of bad cycling in our area posted just 4 days ago (some great ones of the DV junction around 3.25)....some classics in this installment...the camera never lies...

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-VpL34TSY4c&pp=ygUMQmFyYnlvbmFiaWtl

What are hobby cyclists (your words) supposed to wear ?   This ?

I've really never understood the joy people get from sneering at cyclists wearing lycra.  You wouldn't say the same about someone wearing cricket whites, a football shirt or track spikes.

15 hours ago, Rockets said:

But none of us are having to battle horses using the pavement, being close passed by horses whilst we walk along the pavement or see horses ignoring traffic signals are we? And given 26 people were injured by bikes in Southwark last year alone I can't imagine more people are injured by horses or cows....I think you're clutching a bit with that one....

 

As someone who spends a lot of time in and around Dulwich (on foot) and in London (on my bike and on foot) I can tell you that my perspective is that there is a growing proportion of cyclists who cycle in a manner that puts themselves and other road users at risk.

Cycling does have benefits but it has an increasingly bad reputation because of the behaviour of many cyclists who seem to have a selfishness normally levelled at car drivers.

On the day that London rose to the world's third most congested city and other research confirmed that cycling is still under 5% of all daily journeys in London (whilst walking is around 40%) you have to question whether the cycling only focus of so many in TFL and Labour has been misguided.

Of the 26 you have no idea where the fault lies.  You also don't know if any were caused by cycling on pavements.

[Rockets]

4 hours ago, ed_pete said:

Of the 26 you have no idea where the fault lies.  You also don't know if any were caused by cycling on pavements.

And you don't know that they weren't. Given the way a lot of cyclists are ignoring the rules of the road it isn't beyond the realms of possibility that some of them were caused by inconsiderate cycling. I grimace on a daily basis when I see some of the stupidity displayed by some cyclists.

 

It's funny isn't it that we hear constantly from pro-cycle lobby about injuries caused by cars there is never any scrutiny of where the fault lies - that ludicrous Dulwich Roads twitter feed constantly tries to apportion blame on drivers without any consideration for what actually caused an accident - it seems they default to the car must be to blame. 

 

What we do know is that 26 accidents last year in Southwark were caused by bikes hitting pedestrians - some of whom were seriously injured and the issue I took was with those so blinkered that they do not think we need to address it and those who came on here to desperately try to distract attention away from the issue by throwing in the  "yeah, but what about cars".

 

We will never be able to make progress until such time as people acknowledge there is an issue. The Royal Parks were forced to address the problem and I suspect many more will have to follow suit.

[Hen123]

On 25/06/2024 at 23:48, Rockets said:

Just go and stand outside Dulwich Library for 10 minutes tomorrow around school drop or pick up and watch the flying cargo bikes as they cut corners, ignore red lights and fly along the pavements. Then go and walk around Dulwich Square on Sunday for the full kit wally flying down Calton Road stopping for no-one experience....because every ounce of weight is vital and aerodynamics are essential to Sunday hobbyists cyclists it's not only the leg hair that is gone but also the bell so the only warning you get is the sound of a load gear train as they chicane in front of the cheese shop.

Let me know how you get on and if you see any bad cycling.

And then when you have finished there, get on the train at North Dulwich to London Bridge then walk to Bank. Stand and marvel about how bad the cycling is there (no coincidence that this is where the City of London Police target cyclists with their fines and warnings). In fact go to any road junction in central London and just watch how many cyclists ignore red lights, use pavements to shortcut light phases.

For your final treat go and walk around Regents Park and play chicken with the full kit wally peletons hellbent on shaving a nanosecond off their Strava lap time (oh sorry they can't anymore after Strava was encouraged to remove the Regent's Park lap)

Or.maybe just watch Barbyonabike's latest video of bad cycling in our area posted just 4 days ago (some great ones of the DV junction around 3.25)....some classics in this installment...the camera never lies...

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-VpL34TSY4c&pp=ygUMQmFyYnlvbmFiaWtl

Ok I will meet you there for an hour and we can watch together.