City of London wish list

13»

Comments

  • notsoblue
    notsoblue Posts: 5,756
    W1 wrote:
    Erm, moaning about the number of poor old cyclists getting caught compared to twice the number of drivers is basically saying it's unfair to target anti-social cyclists - that's endorsing their behaviour, when we should be condemning it and cheering that 400 iditots will hopefully think twice before RJLing again....

    Again, nobody is moaning that people are getting caught RLJ... The point is that the priorities set in the Police Liaison committees, and the way they're acted upon, are pretty ludicrous and heavily anti-cyclist.
    W1 wrote:
    The 14 page joy or RLJing is here:

    http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... sc&start=0

    I would suggest we re-inflate it's rotting corpse, rather than repeating ourselves here and taking this further O/T.

    Its on topic to discuss the policing of the roads in London in this thread. This isn't specifically about RLJ, nobody is defending it or making excuses for it.
    FCN 4 PX SL Pro SRAM Red
    FCN 8 Scott Sportster '05
  • Headhuunter
    Headhuunter Posts: 6,494
    Alphabet wrote:
    Headhuunter wrote:
    Alphabet wrote:
    Headhuunter wrote:
    I did not argue for a "bobby on every corner" I simply said that if instead of utilising police time to have officers and PCSOs lying in wait to catch cyclists after a crime has been committed, they should move the same officers to the lights side of the junction. Cyclists would see the officer waiting and not RLJ and motorists would find themselves ticked off for entering the ASL and because of the officer's position at the junction, they could clearly see whether the motorist entered the ASL before or after the lights went red (which is always the reason the police say they can't enforce ASLs). Solves 3 problems in 1 swoop.

    The fact is that the police are surely there to PREVENT the law being broken, not to allow it to be broken and then apply fines (revenue generation). That's the reason in many cases speed cameras are signposted so that drivers slow down. It makes more sense for drivers to keep to the speed limit than them speeding, possibly killing someone but getting fined by a police patrol.

    When did I ever say I had been caught RLJ-ing?!

    if you honestly think a cyclist who would otherwise RLJ sees a yellow vested officer at a junction occasionally and therefore decides to wait for the green will become a reformed character because of it, i don't agree with you. if, instead, they have the worry that there might be one lurking after the junction where they wouldn't be pre-warned, they might stop being such an idiot, if only to save themselves some cash

    May be you're right but I doubt many cyclists would literally blast past a line of waiting cars, through a stream of crossing peds, through traffic, right under the nose of a police officer!

    well, 400 apparently have

    Yes but the 400 FPNs issued weren't necessarily for RLJing and in any case the officers wouldn't have been on the traffic lights side of the junction, they would have been lying in wait in the other side to catch people after they have crossed, which is my point... If they had been on the lights side they may have, by their very presence, prevented the RLJ in the 1st place.
    Do not write below this line. Office use only.
  • Alphabet
    Alphabet Posts: 436
    notsoblue wrote:
    W1 wrote:
    Erm, moaning about the number of poor old cyclists getting caught compared to twice the number of drivers is basically saying it's unfair to target anti-social cyclists - that's endorsing their behaviour, when we should be condemning it and cheering that 400 iditots will hopefully think twice before RJLing again....

    Again, nobody is moaning that people are getting caught RLJ... The point is that the priorities set in the Police Liaison committees, and the way they're acted upon, are pretty ludicrous and heavily anti-cyclist.
    W1 wrote:
    The 14 page joy or RLJing is here:

    http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... sc&start=0

    I would suggest we re-inflate it's rotting corpse, rather than repeating ourselves here and taking this further O/T.

    Its on topic to discuss the policing of the roads in London in this thread. This isn't specifically about RLJ, nobody is defending it or making excuses for it.

    I'm determined to ignore this thread, but it's now like a scab i have to pick.

    they're not anti-cyclist. London is ridiculously pro-cyclist these days. it's anti w@ankery cyclist. which most cyclists are too. if you're not a RLJer, you want RLJers to get slapped a bit. they give you a crappy reputation with the rest of the public. stop them and the reputation improves. i can't see an issue with this.

    *scab is now bleeding again*
    Benotto SS/Fixie FCN:5
    Kona Kula FCN:9

    Looking for a cycling buddy?
  • notsoblue
    notsoblue Posts: 5,756
    :lol: Ok, I'm out, this could go back and forth forever :P
    FCN 4 PX SL Pro SRAM Red
    FCN 8 Scott Sportster '05
  • Headhuunter
    Headhuunter Posts: 6,494
    Alphabet wrote:
    notsoblue wrote:
    W1 wrote:
    Erm, moaning about the number of poor old cyclists getting caught compared to twice the number of drivers is basically saying it's unfair to target anti-social cyclists - that's endorsing their behaviour, when we should be condemning it and cheering that 400 iditots will hopefully think twice before RJLing again....

    Again, nobody is moaning that people are getting caught RLJ... The point is that the priorities set in the Police Liaison committees, and the way they're acted upon, are pretty ludicrous and heavily anti-cyclist.
    W1 wrote:
    The 14 page joy or RLJing is here:

    http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... sc&start=0

    I would suggest we re-inflate it's rotting corpse, rather than repeating ourselves here and taking this further O/T.

    Its on topic to discuss the policing of the roads in London in this thread. This isn't specifically about RLJ, nobody is defending it or making excuses for it.

    I'm determined to ignore this thread, but it's now like a scab i have to pick.

    they're not anti-cyclist. London is ridiculously pro-cyclist these days. it's anti w@ankery cyclist. which most cyclists are too. if you're not a RLJer, you want RLJers to get slapped a bit. they give you a crappy reputation with the rest of the public. stop them and the reputation improves. i can't see an issue with this.

    *scab is now bleeding again*

    I'm not denying this but looking at the bigger picture, surely the overall aim of the police should be to prevent accidents on the road. The majority of accidents are caused by th 2 tonnes+ of metal and glass we call motor vehicles, not by RLJers, yet judging by these stats, more attention is being paid to cyclists who do not statistcally cause as many accidents as drivers. I don't mind that the police enforce red lights but I would like them to address motorists' crimes as well to a slightly more proportional level. Currently they ignore such crime as entering ASLs.
    Do not write below this line. Office use only.
  • Headhuunter
    Headhuunter Posts: 6,494
    notsoblue wrote:
    :lol: Ok, I'm out, this could go back and forth forever :P

    OK, OK... I just can't resist replying each time. I'm going to let this one scab over again.... Until next time y'all...
    Do not write below this line. Office use only.
  • Alphabet
    Alphabet Posts: 436
    so we're all agreed that i'm right, right?
    Benotto SS/Fixie FCN:5
    Kona Kula FCN:9

    Looking for a cycling buddy?
  • notsoblue
    notsoblue Posts: 5,756
    Alphabet wrote:
    so we're all agreed that i'm right, right?

    Yep, you won! Congratulations! W1 is first runner up. :D
    FCN 4 PX SL Pro SRAM Red
    FCN 8 Scott Sportster '05
  • W1
    W1 Posts: 2,636
    edited October 2010
    Headhuunter wrote:
    I don't mind that the police enforce red lights but I would like them to address motorists' crimes as well to a slightly more proportional level.

    But they do!

    I'll take your figure that 10% of vehicles in the city are cycles.

    My deep research suggests that five times as many cyclists RLJ as cars.

    That means that cyclists make up 10% of traffic, but proportionately 50% of RLJers.

    They received less than 50% of the FPNs in this crackdown.

    Ergo, they're not being even equally targetted, let alone disproportionately so.

    Edit - sorry, slow typing.

    Edit edit - yay! First loser.
  • Alphabet
    Alphabet Posts: 436
    woo!
    Benotto SS/Fixie FCN:5
    Kona Kula FCN:9

    Looking for a cycling buddy?
  • secretsam
    secretsam Posts: 5,120
    Nuke the whole of the City, would solve a few problems and no need to fix the cycling provision, either.

    Double bonus!!!! 8)
    It's just a hill. Get over it.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 29,411
    Our internet went down just as I posted a particularly stroppy reply, consigning it to the void. Probably just as well. :oops:
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • dhope
    dhope Posts: 6,699
    SecretSam wrote:
    Nuke the whole of the City, would solve a few problems and no need to fix the cycling provision, either.

    Double bonus!!!! 8)

    Did someone say double bonuses? Woohoo, love working in a bank :twisted:
    Rose Xeon CW Disc
    CAAD12 Disc
    Condor Tempo
  • Headhuunter
    Headhuunter Posts: 6,494
    W1 wrote:
    Headhuunter wrote:
    I don't mind that the police enforce red lights but I would like them to address motorists' crimes as well to a slightly more proportional level.

    But they do!

    I'll take your figure that 10% of vehicles in the city are cycles.

    My deep research suggests that five times as many cyclists RLJ as cars.

    That means that cyclists make up 10% of traffic, but proportionately 50% of RLJers.

    They received less than 50% of the FPNs in this crackdown.

    Ergo, they're not being even equally targetted, let alone disproportionately so.

    Edit - sorry, slow typing.

    Edit edit - yay! First loser.

    I just want you to know that I'm trying.... very... hard.... not... to.... respond... argh...
    Do not write below this line. Office use only.
  • OldSkoolKona
    OldSkoolKona Posts: 655
    Do I get to add this thread to the list?? :lol:
    OldSkoolKona wrote:
    RLJ Forum http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12644266
    RLJers bother me more when on a bike than in a car http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12643872
    Shouting at RLJers Part 2 http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12642277
    RLJ Poll http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12642244
    RLJ - What's the big deal? http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12641153
    Red light jumping http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12639661
    Drafting RLJer rear-ends car at Clapham South. http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12639859
    Watch Out RLJ-ers... http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12638534
    Shouting at RLJers http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12636316
    RLJing http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12631121
    RLJ outreach http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12631112
    RLJ Fools! http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12629320
    A police officer's view on RLJ and Pavement Hopping http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12629371
    Red light jumper makes us a laughing stock http://www.bikeradar.com/commuting/foru ... t=12626207

    The main thing (aside for the tangent) is that cyclists need to get their views heard and big up to the OP for kicking that off. A great post here which summarises the joys of Thick Shouty People (as mentioned somewhere in this thread, those with the time to go to these consultations!)
    http://realcycling.blogspot.com/2010/02 ... scuit.html
  • Headhuunter
    Headhuunter Posts: 6,494
    http://realcycling.blogspot.com/2010/02 ... scuit.html

    That's a great links just illustrates perfectly what I've been saying.

    "All we wanted to do was change the current City priority of 'targeting nuisance cyclists' to 'targeting nuisance road users'. "

    "First, you turn up to the meeting. They hold them at times like 10am on a Thursday, when only mad retired locals ... are likely to turn up. "

    "you let the Thick Shouty People rant against pavement cyclists, red-light jumpers, bankers, paedophiles, foreigners etc. Every few seconds they run out of ideas and stop, clearly waiting for a whoop from the audience like on daytime TV. When none comes, they repeat what they've just said verbatim."
    Do not write below this line. Office use only.
  • OldSkoolKona
    OldSkoolKona Posts: 655
    To the OP, if you need some resource to help you in your discussions with the authorities, Cycling England has some great documents:
    http://www.dft.gov.uk/cyclingengland/en ... checklist/

    Also worth checking out what the Cambridge Cycling Campaign have put up on their website - http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/

    (as an aside, this is why I mourn the loss of Cycling England, we'll return to each council doing it their own way and providing more fodder for http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/w ... the-month/ )
  • noodles71
    noodles71 Posts: 153
    But I would wish they would fill in the bloody channels contractors cut across the road properly.

    The one here on Camomile Street is a killer;

    http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&ie= ... 305.5,,0,5


    Is this forum they are going to hold going to take notice of these sorts of things?

Categories