Newcastle's Critical Mass

spen666

rake wrote:

you said its not illegal to ride your bike spen but i suspect organising a demonstration with no aim or purpose is.

no its not - except in limited locations eg Parliament Sq

commuters have a purpose to get to work. they arent trying to organise chaos. you might have a job and need to drive there one day.

spen666

cervelors wrote:

We clearly are at opposite ends of spectrum. But I do not like being called stupid. The bottom line is that CM is aimed at creating blockages. I personally think this is making a negative impact amongst the public in general. But - crack on, you will convince yourself you are correct.

CM is not aimed at creating blockages - you keep making this false allegation

cervelors

I am backing out of this one. Everything I have read about CM is to make a point with a large number of cyclists. It is not for me.

Crapaud

spen666 wrote:

Debate over really isn't it.

Nope!

shouldbeinbed

spen666 wrote:

So lets get this right?

Motorists are fine to block the road every day of the week having a critical mass at least twice a day

Cyclists however are wrong to use this road once a month?

Where is the sharing in that?

oh dear.

I'll happily agree that there too many cars on the roads but to equate the daily commute with a premeditated bike critical mass is clutching at straws even by your standards.

and where does anyone say this exactly? or any of the other ban CM and its the thin end of the wedge to banning cyclists smokescreen rhetoric you've spouted I think the consensus of the anti's is that cyclists are not doing themselves or the rest of us any favours by deliberately and maliciously with no commercial need or commuting purpose choosing to 'share' the road from what I've seen by riding in a way which blocks it (sorry it doesn't block it does it thats not what CM is about :roll: ) how about: for no commuting or commercially viable reason impedes every other road user and at a snails pace. do you CM at your commuting speed Spen? and do you all do it in single file or no more than two abreast?

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTr ... /DG_069837 the highway code doesn't seem to like more than 2 abreast, and given the furore on drivers on mobiles etc being distracted, if you're doing it to join up with your friends and socialise, are you totally focussed on what you are doing, cycling safely and with due care and attention?

RTA scetion 28 deems it to be an offence to cycle recklessly (ok maybe reckless is pushing it a bit but not everyone has your experience and skills). if theres people there 'encouraged to ride their bikes' and/or that have never ridden in a bunch before and choose to learn to do it on open roads in the middle of rush hour is that not somewhat reckless, given the propensity for pro cyclists on closed roads to get tangled up with each other and road furniture and hit the deck?

and section 29 under the title 'careless and inconsiderate cycling' states: If a person rides a cycle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offence. In this section “road” includes a bridleway.

for me that sums up CM quite nicely


you've also chosen not to explain why a Sunday morining critial mass somewhere far less central wouldn't be just as good since it's so much more of a social event than a protest or intention to annoy motorists and 'reclaim the streets'

spen666

shouldbeinbed wrote:

spen666 wrote:

So lets get this right?

Motorists are fine to block the road every day of the week having a critical mass at least twice a day

Cyclists however are wrong to use this road once a month?

Where is the sharing in that?

oh dear.

I'll happily agree that there too many cars on the roads but to equate the daily commute with a premeditated bike critical mass is clutching at straws even by your standards.

I'm not saying there are too many cars on the road.

If you or anyone elsewants to drive a car on the road it is their ( and my) right to do so.

I do not want to restrict or reduce anyone's right to use the road.


The road is there for everyone to use, wheter motorist, cyclists, skater, horse rider or whatever.

I, unlike you am not trying to say people should not have the right to use the road at any time of day.

and where does anyone say this exactly? or any of the other ban CM and its the thin end of the wedge to banning cyclists smokescreen rhetoric you've spouted I think the consensus of the anti's is that cyclists are not doing themselves or the rest of us any favours by deliberately and maliciously with no commercial need or commuting purpose choosing to 'share' the road from what I've seen by riding in a way which blocks it (sorry it doesn't block it does it thats not what CM is about :roll: ) how about: for no commuting or commercially viable reason impedes every other road user and at a snails pace. do you CM at your commuting speed Spen? and do you all do it in single file or no more than two abreast?

Ahhh yes lets use the consensus of motorists shall we, well in that case, you'd better stop riding on the roads at any time as consensus of many road users is that cyclists have no place on the roads. A very dangerous argument to go down.

We'd still have slavery, no rights for women etc if at various points in time we had just accepted the consensus of the populations view as being correct and not challenged it.


The whole essence of freedom is that you are free to do what you want with as few restrictions as are necessary, not as many restrictions as popular opinion calls for

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTr ... /DG_069837 the highway code doesn't seem to like more than 2 abreast, and given the furore on drivers on mobiles etc being distracted, if you're doing it to join up with your friends and socialise, are you totally focussed on what you are doing, cycling safely and with due care and attention?

firstly, the Highway code is not the law, so breaking the Highway Code is not an offence.

Do I cycle safely when with friends? Well I've never had or caused an accident when riding with friends - what other measure is there?

You do not in law whether driving a motor vehicle or riding a bike have to be TOTALLY focussed to carry out that activity.
THe law refers to driving without due care and attention or without due consideration for other road users. That is a different test from the one you are espousing.


however, lets take your test- you are effectively making riding a bike a solo activity. So all cycling clubs, friends riding, parents out with kids etc would be acting unlawfully as they are not totally focussed.

Yep - that will encourage cycling won't it?

RTA scetion 28 deems it to be an offence to cycle recklessly (ok maybe reckless is pushing it a bit but not everyone has your experience and skills). if theres people there 'encouraged to ride their bikes' and/or that have never ridden in a bunch before and choose to learn to do it on open roads in the middle of rush hour is that not somewhat reckless, given the propensity for pro cyclists on closed roads to get tangled up with each other and road furniture and hit the deck?

Ahh yes, not what did you say earlier about the speed of CM- now you are equating it to a race- yes, CM goes at 40+mph with Cavendish and co fighting for position.

I think you are arguing aginst yourself here. Carry on

and section 29 under the title 'careless and inconsiderate cycling' states: If a person rides a cycle on a road without due care and attention, or without reasonable consideration for other persons using the road, he is guilty of an offence. In this section “road” includes a bridleway.

for me that sums up CM quite nicely

So lets get this right, you are saying that the mere fact someone is riding a bike when someone else wants to drive on that bit of road is an offence

so, cyclists don't have as much right to use the road as others and its the rights of the fastest vehicles that prevail and anyone slowing them down is committing an offence?

Dream on mr Toad

you've also chosen not to explain why a Sunday morining critial mass somewhere far less central wouldn't be just as good since it's so much more of a social event than a protest or intention to annoy motorists and 'reclaim the streets'

See my point above re right to use the road- it is a right, not a time limited right.

Perhsaps we should do as you say and stop these pesky cyclists getting in the way of the motor vehicles betwqeen 0600 and say 2000 evey wekkday so they don't affect rush hour traffic or people going about their work.

Cyclists have the RIGHT to use the road. PERIOD

tomb353

so critical mass in Newcastle tonight, will be popping along for a bit.

some of the posters above need to keep in mind that this attempt to revive CM in Newcastle has been made after a concerted to confront the council on paper and at public meetings over their failure to make the city centre better for cyclists. All that is proposed is riding on the roads, the city is quiet for the hols, it'll be fun.

Crapaud

tomb353 wrote:

so critical mass in Newcastle tonight, will be popping along for a bit.

some of the posters above need to keep in mind that this attempt to revive CM in Newcastle has been made after a concerted to confront the council on paper and at public meetings over their failure to make the city centre better for cyclists. All that is proposed is riding on the roads, the city is quiet for the hols, it'll be fun.

Likewise some CMers need to realise that CM has never, in it's quite long history, achieved anything, anywhere. If it has, they're keeping it to themselves.

You'd think that the OP would've been back by now to explain the positives of CM. Perhaps there aren't any.

tomb353

i don't think CM tries to achieve anything, it just "is"

Crapaud

tomb353 wrote:

i don't think CM tries to achieve anything, it just "is"

Your previous post would imply differently:

tomb353 wrote:

... some of the posters above need to keep in mind that this attempt to revive CM in Newcastle has been made after a concerted to confront the council on paper and at public meetings over their failure to make the city centre better for cyclists. All that is proposed is riding on the roads, the city is quiet for the hols, it'll be fun.

tomb353

no, CM is a demonstration of sorts, with no coherent aims, but it would be wrong to say that those who participate do not also contribute to more sophisticaed efforts to influence our built environment as others were suggesting above. I see no harm in a bit of arnarchic demonstration at times.

simonmcqueen

tomb353 wrote:

i don't think CM tries to achieve anything, it just "is"

All very Zen! You'll be on about one hand clapping next, you bleddy hippie...

How's things anyway Tom?

sirmy

I've just watched the video of the July Newcastle CM on YouTube and I have a question - is Newcastle a cyclists paradise? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvzW2bUO ... youtu.be&a)

I ask this (tongue in cheek) as I counted (and I will admit I may have missed a few) 12 cars during the ride, only 2 which were on the same side as the ride and they passed at a reasonable speed, no horns blaring or abusive shouts - sheer bliss. And yet a voice can be heard mentioning angry motorists!

The worst congestion in the whole 9.51 video was caused by the clutter of bikes and riders on the pavement at the end of the ride! (Of course the vid may just have missed the tailback of cars behind the ride)