Cyclists taking over paths!!

[malumbu]

Got a simple (a) to (c) here Rocks

(a) I dislike cyclists

(b) I am blaming cyclists for all the issues over ULEZ, LTN, CPZ

(c) Cyclists are fine, its a good and sustainable way of getting around,  Some sadly need better training and to obey the highway code.

 

I expect it is a (b) on this one.  No need to post any more on this subject then.

[Rockets]

Or d) Yet more examples of terrible cycling - a problem that seems to be getting worse and needs policing as cyclists aren't doing it themselves

[snowy]

I wonder whether Rocks agrees with his opening comment of "scumbag, i hope you get hit by a bus" towards a cyclist?

[Rockets]

Nope but given how bad the cycling is woudn't you agree the cyclist/s is/are increasing the chances of that happening considerably?

Edited August 6, 2023 by Rockets

[snowy]

Don't try to change the subject. You watched that video in which he says that he "hopes [someone] gets hit by a bus" and thought, 'i know thats just what i want to post on the EDF'. Right?

[exdulwicher]

40 minutes ago, Rockets said:

Or d) Yet more examples of terrible cycling - a problem that seems to be getting worse and needs policing as cyclists aren't doing it themselves

Why are cyclists responsible for "policing" anything?! 

It's not a "community" or a "collective" or anything like that - when I am on a bike I have zero responsibility for any other cyclist behaviour. I'm not the police, I'm not i charge and frankly I dont care. In the same way that when I'm driving, I am not responsible for the illegal behaviour of any other driver. When I'm walking, I don't berate other pedestrians for not crossing at the zebra crossing.

People who cycle are connected only by the fact that they sometimes use the same mode of transport so stop with the collective responsibility and blaming.

Examples of bad driving aren't considered to reflect badly on everyone who drives a car – and rightly so. Similarly, it would be ridiculous to claim that everyone using public transport is a fare-dodger, simply because some people use public transport without paying.

It is also a fallacy to believe that prejudiced views would disappear if the subjects of prejudice were to behave in a certain ‘approved’ way.

It also blows a hole in the claim on the LTN thread that we should simply have "shared space for all" and "behave nicely". One person's idea of behaving nicely is someone else's idea of selfish idiocy.

[Rockets]

Oh do try another one.....Good grief.....you're getting really desperate now...

[snowy]

Such projection

[malumbu]

I was at the East Dulwich Cabaret years ago at the EDT.  An inexperienced comedian was being heckled so my mate turns on the person in the audience.  Oh good the hecklers being heckled said the comedian.  I feel just like that comedian.  There will be whole communities on the web where you can join in with others looking at videos of cyclists and tut tut with them Rocks, not really sure what you get out of it here.  Strange.  (That is (e), no real reason just strange).

[Rockets]

Keep it on topic Malumbu...you're meandering.....or is there a cyclists on paths punchline we are wating for....?

3 hours ago, exdulwicher said:

Why are cyclists responsible for "policing" anything?! 

It's not a "community" or a "collective" or anything like that - when I am on a bike I have zero responsibility for any other cyclist behaviour. I'm not the police, I'm not i charge and frankly I dont care. In the same way that when I'm driving, I am not responsible for the illegal behaviour of any other driver. When I'm walking, I don't berate other pedestrians for not crossing at the zebra crossing.

People who cycle are connected only by the fact that they sometimes use the same mode of transport so stop with the collective responsibility and blaming.

Examples of bad driving aren't considered to reflect badly on everyone who drives a car – and rightly so. Similarly, it would be ridiculous to claim that everyone using public transport is a fare-dodger, simply because some people use public transport without paying.

It is also a fallacy to believe that prejudiced views would disappear if the subjects of prejudice were to behave in a certain ‘approved’ way.

It also blows a hole in the claim on the LTN thread that we should simply have "shared space for all" and "behave nicely". One person's idea of behaving nicely is someone else's idea of selfish idiocy.

No Ex- you are wrong on this. Every cyclist has a responsibility to self-police, just in the same way car drivers do too. Policing is required for those who flaunt and break the rules whether they are a cyclist or driver. As a driver I keep to the speed limit, this often upsets drivers who want to go faster but I am helping police. I have stopped at red lights whilst cycling and been berated by those cyclists who do not want to stop at red lights. I have told them that we all need to respect the rules of the road. That's me helping police cycling too.

But who is policing cyclists. My suggestion is to get the council or police to enforce the rules for cyclists...they are being forced to do it in other parts of London so why not Southwark. As a cyclist I have nothing to be afraid of because it don't flaunt the rules.

What is interesting is the reaction by many of the pro-lobby, you don't see many criticising anything to do with the behaviour of cyclists, happy to turn a blind eye to bad cycling whilst calling out bad driving.

And then look at Snowy's over-excited reaction to what they perceive to be a gotcha...more interested with trying to make a ludicrous accusation and make utterly pointless and childish accusations than addressing anything in the video posted. So wonderfully predictable.

[snowy]

You're funny! I would say that you post like a teenager, but that's disrespectful to teenagers

You get caught posting a video without watching it properly first. That video has your hero character calling someone a scumbag and hoping that they get hit by a bus. Serious personal injury was not the argument that you were really trying to make but you have an inability not to always last word every conversation you have. 

No one here is not calling out poor road behaviour. That's all in your imagination. And your examples don't qualify your actions. Driving to the speed limit? Certainly proving the adage that not all heroes wear capes.

Anyway, to the point you were trying to make when not sulking - it's policed less than you want because the govt and the police don't think its a priority because its proven severity and impact are of lower consequence than risk and harm caused by other road users. Its policed proportionally. 

Which means that you are down to a sort of Schrodinger's cyclist argument - allegedly their numbers are down, so provision for infrastructure should be reduced, but offenses by cyclists are up and therefore should be policed. Given that a fixed penalty notice is what a cyclist would be fined , why aren't the police / southwark seeing them as a great cash cow?

[exdulwicher]

12 hours ago, Rockets said:

No Ex- you are wrong on this. Every cyclist has a responsibility to self-police, just in the same way car drivers do too. 

https://twitter.com/ColdWarCliff/status/1688462280302718976?t=DTItHwERTuI3Y8exqdGB1Q&s=19

Yes, I can see how effectively the lovely trustworthy licenced/taxed/insured drivers can self-police... One weekend on London roads (and that's nowhere close to all of it). Can you advise (as a good citizen policing drivers yourself) how one should attempt to address this behaviour? Maybe next time I'm riding to the shops, I'll abandon my journey and chase down every other road user I see breaking whatever rules I decide on and berate them. Wonder how that'd go...? 🤔

Somehow you're not calling these drivers out for their behaviour and the cost to the taxpayer in police, ambulance, NHS resources being occupied?!

Obviously an oversight while you work on the true danger out there, some bloke on a Lime bike scooting harmlessly across a few yards of pavement.

[first mate]

But there are already a range of fines and other punitive measures in regard to car drivers. Poor driving has repeatedly been called out by anti LTN and CPZ posters on this forum (speeding on Barry road for instance).

If your aim is to increase cycling so it becomes the primary transport choice and more dominant on roads and paths, then surely we have to also look at ways to manage bad/risky cycling behaviour? Why would you have a problem with that?

[mr.chicken]

2 minutes ago, first mate said:

But there are already a range of fines and other punitive measures in regard to car drivers. Poor driving has repeatedly been called out by anti LTN and CPZ posters on this forum (speeding on Barry road for instance).

There are for bikes, it's just not very well enforced. It seems the Tories would rather the limited amount of police time available after the decade+ of cuts is used to suppress protest than police the community.

3 minutes ago, first mate said:

Why would you have a problem with that?

Why are you inventing a viewpoint that literally no one holds?

Realistically, there is limited police time to dedicate to any one task, and it's far out of the hands of Southwark council to provide significantly more. So, what strategy would you choose to police it, and importantly what would you choose to not police in it's place, because that is a necessary tradeoff?

I remember as a student, every so often a bunch of police would camp out on a bridge in winter and issue fixed penalty fines to every cyclist passing over the bridge without lights (a lot of them). It was, I admit, richly satisfying because I always used lights and was annoyed by people who didn't, but over all it just didn't make that much difference, because the fines aren't immense, lazyness is a powerful force and the likelihood of getting caught are low.

However resources should be spent rationally, not based on what you or I find satisfying in the moment. So go on what's your idea? How would YOU like to see it policed and which resources would YOU divert to police it?

[first mate]

You are getting very shouty and excitable today Mr Chicken. I think we can possibly take a look at PSPOS and CEOs. I know Ex does not agree but the money and resources are/will be there and it seems reasonable to allocate some of that to Equal streets and better managing cycling behaviour.

[exdulwicher]

21 minutes ago, first mate said:

Surely we have to also look at ways to manage bad/risky cycling behaviour? 

OK but we're going back to my previous question - what exactly are you looking to "manage"?

Cycling on pavements - essentially decriminalised, it's allowed anyway in some places (shared space which some people on here seem very keen on when they want it to apply to cars) and kids are allowed to do it anyway so ... 🤷🏻‍♂️ The usual argument is if you don't want cyclists to use pavements, build proper cycle lanes. But then you kick off about loss of parking and loss of road space...

Pedestrians/blind/elderly are not being scattered to the winds, knocked flying etc, mostly because cyclists, no matter how selfish and ignorant they are, generally look out for #1 anyway and they know that if they hit anyone or anything, they'll likely get injured too.

Running red lights - depends on the scenario but plenty of places allow turns on red or to use a red light as a Stop sign and "proceed if safe". As a general rule once you have pedestrians and cyclists, you don't really need red lights since they'll just self-manage. For example:

https://youtu.be/RTLDfBS9xH8

And again, as a general rule it causes no inconvenience to anyone - if anything it's quite helpful for bikes to bugger off out the way at junctions which is why there are advanced stop lights at some - like GreendaleEDG/Townley for example which essentially legitimises RLJ by creating a bike phase. Green for bike, red for vehicles. Now imagine that same junction without the advance green and imagine cyclists creating their own 5second head start. Same principle.

Speeding - speed limits don't apply to bikes, and they not going faster than the cars and buses so largely irrelevant. 

Riding without lights at night - already illegal, can already be prosecuted.

Riding without helmet - not illegal, mind your own business.

Riding 2 abreast - not illegal, no different to a vehicle in front.

I'm not saying all cyclists are saints because they're not. But in terms of priorities you've got drivers - killing 1700 people per year nationally; and cyclists - killing 1 person per year.

TfL has all sorts of collision and fatality statistics on London and overwhelmingly, it's pedestrians and cyclists being killed/injured by drivers. 

So we're back to the original question - what "bad cycling" are you seeking to police?

[mr.chicken]

2 hours ago, exdulwicher said:

Riding 2 abreast - not illegal, no different to a vehicle in front.

When I cycle, I plonk myself right in the middle of the lane. I'm far more likely to be injured by a careless person opening a car door or an impatient idiot trying and failing to "squeeze past" (something I've seen happen more than once) than by someone intent on murdering me intentionally running me over.

I pull over and leave enough space for cars to pass when it is safe for them to do so.

The great things about the LTNs and 20mph speed limit is the difference in speed is pretty small so there's much less need to pull over to allow faster traffic to pass.

[Rockets]

But look at those videos of some of the cycling in Dulwich seen on a regular basis - is it considerate to other road users and would it make you fell safe as a pedestrian? 

 

Look at the Dulwich Library junction - it is not great for pedestrians due to the number of bikes ignoring the lights or the rules of the road. It definitely needs some intervention from the police or council, other authorities are having to do it in London so Southwark should follow suit in those hot spots that need it most. Surely everyone can agree to that?

[malumbu]

over 20 years of cycling through Dulwich Rocks, including 100s of hours when it was my regular commute.  You may have seen me cycling there today.  I really don't recognise this picture you are painting.  We clearly live on different planets.

Why oh why are you so angry about all these things?

[first mate]

Not angry but simply recognising we are entering new territory, serried ranks of hire e-bikes and scooters are new. Infrastructure is changing at pace. To even make a link between what is happening now and what you experienced 20 years ago is pointless.

4 hours ago, exdulwicher said:

OK but we're going back to my previous question - what exactly are you looking to "manage"?

Cycling on pavements - essentially decriminalised, it's allowed anyway in some places (shared space which some people on here seem very keen on when they want it to apply to cars) and kids are allowed to do it anyway so ... 🤷🏻‍♂️ The usual argument is if you don't want cyclists to use pavements, build proper cycle lanes. But then you kick off about loss of parking and loss of road space...

Pedestrians/blind/elderly are not being scattered to the winds, knocked flying etc, mostly because cyclists, no matter how selfish and ignorant they are, generally look out for #1 anyway and they know that if they hit anyone or anything, they'll likely get injured too.

Running red lights - depends on the scenario but plenty of places allow turns on red or to use a red light as a Stop sign and "proceed if safe". As a general rule once you have pedestrians and cyclists, you don't really need red lights since they'll just self-manage. For example:

https://youtu.be/RTLDfBS9xH8

And again, as a general rule it causes no inconvenience to anyone - if anything it's quite helpful for bikes to bugger off out the way at junctions which is why there are advanced stop lights at some - like GreendaleEDG/Townley for example which essentially legitimises RLJ by creating a bike phase. Green for bike, red for vehicles. Now imagine that same junction without the advance green and imagine cyclists creating their own 5second head start. Same principle.

Speeding - speed limits don't apply to bikes, and they not going faster than the cars and buses so largely irrelevant. 

Riding without lights at night - already illegal, can already be prosecuted.

Riding without helmet - not illegal, mind your own business.

Riding 2 abreast - not illegal, no different to a vehicle in front.

I'm not saying all cyclists are saints because they're not. But in terms of priorities you've got drivers - killing 1700 people per year nationally; and cyclists - killing 1 person per year.

TfL has all sorts of collision and fatality statistics on London and overwhelmingly, it's pedestrians and cyclists being killed/injured by drivers. 

So we're back to the original question - what "bad cycling" are you seeking to police?

I cited some research in another thread (not sure I can find it again) that was done I think in Amsterdam and that indicated vulnerable sections of society( elderly, less mobile, disabled) felt increasingly threatened and alienated both by driver and cyclist behaviour. Part of that was cycling on pavements.

If cyclists feel unable to cycle on roads ( I fail to see why if a residential side street) then surely on busy pavements they should simply dismount and walk until they can get onto the road or a cycle path? Maybe we should re-criminalise cycling on non designated pavements.

 

[snowy]

All of which are speed limited and require actual ID linked to an individual to hire - unlike a car - which is registered to an owner not the operator.

Simple answer to the library junction is to add a green light bike filter - a cyclists only crossing phase.

[malumbu]

FM this means I've been cycling in Dulwich since at least the early 00s.  In fact much longer.  Yes I've seen many changes, drop handlebars are back, most of us now wear helmets, cycling infrastructure is much better, generally drivers are slower as 20mph.  But I've not seen an increase in cyclists hassling pedestrians.  In fact I don't think I've seen this at all.

[first mate]

Mal, it may surprise you to know so have I, in ED and all the way into central London. There has always been the occasional bad behaviour; I am not sure I would describe it as 'hassling' pedestrians, which implies some sort of deliberate antagonism. But, 'cycling carelessly', 'without due care', 'being locked in a bit of a cycling bubble', while on the pavement, I am seeing more of. 
 

I would concede that many of those behaviours occur elsewhere (pedestrians looking at tech and paying zero attention, car drivers scandalously doing similar etc.. On pavements I do feel very strongly  that pedestrians must come first.
 

The bikes everywhere culture is new and a developing one, we have one way or another to get appropriate etiquette down and largely adhered to. Forgive me, but old time cyclists like you are not the case at issue here. This is the case of people that want to get from a-z as quickly as possible, dump and go. It is not a hobby or a passion.

[Rockets]

2 hours ago, malumbu said:

FM this means I've been cycling in Dulwich since at least the early 00s.  In fact much longer.  Yes I've seen many changes, drop handlebars are back, most of us now wear helmets, cycling infrastructure is much better, generally drivers are slower as 20mph.  But I've not seen an increase in cyclists hassling pedestrians.  In fact I don't think I've seen this at all.

You clearly aren't spending enough time in Dulwich...or Southwark for that matter....;-)

[mr.chicken]

Wow @first mate you really don't like bold text do you? 😆

Anyway you spent so much time tone policing that you forgot to talk about the actual policing.

So I'm asking you, not vague generalities of which you are so fine but since you [not bold] specifically want to assign more resources to tackle scofflaw cyclists what would you [also not bold] take resources from.

None of those people you want to reassign are sitting idle. So your reassignment means something gets less policed.

What in your opinion should get less attention?

I'm beginning to think you're an "ideas guy" who comes up with notions and leaves it to others to figure out how to do more with less as it were. Maybe you can try suggesting the police solve more crime and that the NHS should treat people faster. No one's thought of them you see.