Addison Lee: It's okay to run over grannies

greg66_tri_v2.0

Rick Chasey wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Aha.

That was to be expected no?

He's retreated back to Greg's Kernal...

He's learned the hard way not to let a desire to grab a headline obscure a sensible point.

I'd be surprised if it is a Ratners' moment though.

No it's not. I'd say a significant proportion of the outrage is the result of people applying their Addison Lee prejudice to misunderstand the gist of the original article.

FTFY.

My, these houses look familiar. I swear I've seen them before.

rick_chasey

*sighs*

You win

greg66_tri_v2.0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJt8klnGPtk

Coriander

Greg66 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Aha.

That was to be expected no?

He's retreated back to Greg's Kernal...

He's learned the hard way not to let a desire to grab a headline obscure a sensible point.

I'd be surprised if it is a Ratner's moment though.

FTFY

Greg, twice in one day? I'd suggest it might be the holiday that's caused the problem, not what might solve it.

Right, I'm off back under my stone.

tailwindhome

Coriander wrote:

Right, I'm off back under my stone.

Noooo

Stay a while

greg66_tri_v2.0

Coriander wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Aha.

That was to be expected no?

He's retreated back to Greg's Kernal...

He's learned the hard way not to let a desire to grab a headline obscure a sensible point.

I'd be surprised if it is a Ratner's moment though.

FTFY

Greg, twice in one day? I'd suggest it might be the holiday that's caused the problem, not what might solve it.

Right, I'm off back under my stone.

Nope, that's a miss, as we say in Battleships.

"Ratners" (with an "s", no apostrophe) was the name of the business.

Hence a moment concerning the business is a Ratners' moment.

Gerald Ratner as everyone knows was the loose-mouthed director. If I had been referring to him, I would have said "a Ratner moment".

No way is apostrophe-s correct.

Anyway, Cori, stay out and enjoy the sunshine. It can't be fun spending all that time under the same rock...

Coriander

Greg66 wrote:

Coriander wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Aha.

That was to be expected no?

He's retreated back to Greg's Kernal...

He's learned the hard way not to let a desire to grab a headline obscure a sensible point.

I'd be surprised if it is a Ratner's moment though.

FTFY

Greg, twice in one day? I'd suggest it might be the holiday that's caused the problem, not what might solve it.

Right, I'm off back under my stone.

Nope, that's a miss, as we say in Battleships.

"Ratners" (with an "s", no apostrophe) was the name of the business.

Hence a moment concerning the business is a Ratners' moment.

Gerald Ratner as everyone knows was the loose-mouthed director. If I had been referring to him, I would have said "a Ratner moment".

No way is apostrophe-s correct.

Anyway, Cori, stay out and enjoy the sunshine. It can't be fun spending all that time under the same rock...

The company name was The Ratner Group. So I maintain it should be 'a Ratner's moment'. There's possibly a whole other argument about whether the company name was correctly punctuated...

bigmat

No apostrophe at all, surely? "Ratners" in this context is describing the moment that is the subject of the sentence. The moment doesn't belong to Ratners (singular or plural). This could of course be rubbish, nobody ever taught me grammar

greg66_tri_v2.0

Coriander wrote:

The company name was The Ratner Group. So I maintain it's should be 'a Ratner's moment'. There's possibly a whole other argument about whether the company name was correctly punctuated...

Uh-uh: http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/1f1f8 ... ompdetails

Always with an "s".

And the trading name was with an "s":

Dog? Bone? Me?

Woof!

rjsterry

There's no apostrophe at all, the moment doesn't belong to Ratner or Ratners, it is simply named after him/the company. It is a Ratner or Ratners moment.

<walks off shaking head>

bigmat

BigMat wrote:

No apostrophe at all, surely? "Ratners" in this context is describing the moment that is the subject of the sentence. The moment doesn't belong to Ratners (singular or plural). This could have course be rubbish, nobody ever taught me grammar

Could I just pick bikeradar up on its grammar here? I typed "could of course" and it has defaulted to "could have course". Weird. I assumed it was my mistake, but when I clicked to edit the editable text reverted back to my original. Rick, sort it out!

PBo

BigMat wrote:

BigMat wrote:

No apostrophe at all, surely? "Ratners" in this context is describing the moment that is the subject of the sentence. The moment doesn't belong to Ratners (singular or plural). This could, of course, be rubbish, nobody ever taught me grammar

Could I just pick bikeradar up on its grammar here? I typed "could have course" and it has defaulted to "could have course". Weird. I assumed it was my mistake, but when I clicked to edit the editable text reverted back to my original. Rick, sort it out!

FTFY

MonkeyMonster

All you lot wrote:

It's friday and home time

FTFY

ilm_zero7

iPete wrote:

I'd quite to be a fly on the wall of the AL offices today, it's all going a little bit viral now.

they have a twitter account - seems to be full of supporters and staff - I dont do Twatter, but this is a very public place to air your views, but be careful what you say

shouldbeinbed

Origamist wrote:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3390328.ece

John Griffin has told The Times: “My foreword in Addison Lee’s magazine Add Lib, has caused quite a storm on Twitter. In the article, I argued for compulsory training and insurance for London’s bicycle owners and I stand by my contention.

“I accept that the tone of the article was perhaps a little too inflammatory. It was meant to entertain and generate debate, but the online reaction has obscured the main message that there are many inexperienced cyclists who need better training to be safe on London’s busy roads.

“Contrary to what has been reported, at no point did I suggest that motorists are never to blame. Both cyclists and motorists have a responsibility to use the roads safely.

“Cycling is a serious issue and lives are at stake. There have been huge campaigns recently to encourage cycling, but hardly any have addressed improving safety and road awareness of cyclists. If my article causes a debate around whether cyclists need training and holding to the same standards as other road users, bring it on.”

Edited for the benefit of Admin

can't say I disagree with the notion of compulsory bikeability for all, however unenforceable it may be in reality, its another spon on DDD's insurance thread - as cyclists do we/should we?

I suppose the argument could be that the ease and facility to kill or maim your fellow human being with practically no risk of similar harm to yourself is exponentially higher in a ton and a half of car moving through a soft squishy environment at 30 mph than +/-12 stone of predominantly soft and squishy going at half the speed, so the training and awareness expectations should be disproportionately greater for those that make that choice.

One thing that does rile me is the 'think bike' type campaigns, is that its always motorbikes, we're either deliberately or by inference forgotten and tacitly excluded from the be aware you have a shared responsibility towards their safety message. I'd have been much happier for Mr Addison Lee to have climbed down with one simple word change in the quote.

Applespider

shouldbeinbed wrote:

One thing that does rile me is the 'think bike' type campaigns, is that its always motorbikes, we're either deliberately or by inference forgotten and tacitly excluded from the be aware you have a shared responsibility towards their safety message.

I'd disagree with that. Certainly on the various radio versions of it, I've heard a motorcycling and a cycling version of it. I think the motorcycle one is stronger and cleverer but I did notice the cycle one.

I don't think there's anything wrong with suggesting new cyclists get some training before venturing out onto busy roads - or at the very least practice hand signals and shoulder checks in the local park. But he does seem to be ignoring the chunk of the Highway Code quoted earlier and suggesting that it's rarely the motorists fault. That doesn't entirely surprise me given personal experience of some of his drivers (as a cyclist and as a passenger). I'd never realised that they actually got any drivers' training so I've learned something new from the thread!

optimisticbiker

On a positive note, and just to show that not all AL drivers are that bad (flame suit on), I did encounter an AL delivery van (not a tax... err PHV, it has to be said) yesterday evening who slowed to let me overtake a stationary bus. I gave him the thumbs up and got a wave back. At the next lights I pulled alongside and he wound down the window and shouted... "Don't believe all you read, we don't all agree"... It only occured to me later that that would have been totally cryptic to anyone who hadn't heard of these rants... or does that mean AL drivers have had some flak from this already?

jimmypippa

On a tangent, I've just got back from New Zealand and the roads have lots of posters telling drivers to leave at least 1.5 metres when passing cyclists.

It didn't seem particularly bike friendly*, but that struck me as a good step; the highway code does give similar guidance, but I cant recall any publicity about it, and many UK drivers seem unaware of this.

*Given the general attitude to health and safety, the mandatory cycle helmet law (wiki) seems even more misguided for example and I do wear one, but understand about safety in numbers...

veronese68

OptimisticBiker wrote:

On a positive note, and just to show that not all AL drivers are that bad (flame suit on), I did encounter an AL delivery van (not a tax... err PHV, it has to be said) yesterday evening who slowed to let me overtake a stationary bus. I gave him the thumbs up and got a wave back. At the next lights I pulled alongside and he wound down the window and shouted... "Don't believe all you read, we don't all agree"... It only occured to me later that that would have been totally cryptic to anyone who hadn't heard of these rants... or does that mean AL drivers have had some flak from this already?

That's good to hear. I should think a fair few of their staff had a bit of a facepalm moment when they read the original statement and realised the amount of flak they would get.

t.m.h.n.e.t

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01gd4ly

16mins onwards peeps. Mr Griffin speaks :shock: "poetic licence"

deptfordmarmoset

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01gd4ly

16mins onwards peeps. Mr Griffin speaks :shock: "poetic licence"

And when cyclists get upset it's ''posturing.''

t.m.h.n.e.t

deptfordmarmoset wrote:

T.M.H.N.E.T wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01gd4ly

16mins onwards peeps. Mr Griffin speaks :shock: "poetic licence"

And when cyclists get upset it's ''posturing.''

If anyone would like a decent MP3 of the Griffin interview let me know May come in handy sometime.

Agent57

What is it with people called "Griffin"?

Anyway, I'm a supporter of training for cyclists. Not necessarily compulsory, but I think that aside from the costs and logistics of delivering the training, there aren't really any good arguments against people being trained to use the roads responsibly.

I did my cycling proficiency at school when I was about 8, back in the 70s, and it has seen me through about 35 years of on-road cycling. I'm often appalled at the way some other people ride, and to be honest I'm not surprised some motorists get irate at cyclists.

Ideally, all school-age children would have an opportunity to have cycling training at school; preferably junior school. And if we could persuade more adults to do something like Bikeability, so much the better.

SimonAH

Agent57 wrote:

What is it with people called "Griffin"?

Anyway, I'm a supporter of training for cyclists. Not necessarily compulsory, but I think that aside from the costs and logistics of delivering the training, there aren't really any good arguments against people being trained to use the roads responsibly.

I did my cycling proficiency at school when I was about 8, back in the 70s, and it has seen me through about 35 years of on-road cycling. I'm often appalled at the way some other people ride, and to be honest I'm not surprised some motorists get irate at cyclists.

Ideally, all school-age children would have an opportunity to have cycling training at school; preferably junior school. And if we could persuade more adults to do something like Bikeability, so much the better.

Couldn't agree more, but most junior schools have dropped cycle training due to liability issues - serious shame IMO.

rjsterry

SimonAH wrote:

Agent57 wrote:

What is it with people called "Griffin"?

Anyway, I'm a supporter of training for cyclists. Not necessarily compulsory, but I think that aside from the costs and logistics of delivering the training, there aren't really any good arguments against people being trained to use the roads responsibly.

I did my cycling proficiency at school when I was about 8, back in the 70s, and it has seen me through about 35 years of on-road cycling. I'm often appalled at the way some other people ride, and to be honest I'm not surprised some motorists get irate at cyclists.

Ideally, all school-age children would have an opportunity to have cycling training at school; preferably junior school. And if we could persuade more adults to do something like Bikeability, so much the better.

Couldn't agree more, but most junior schools have dropped cycle training due to liability issues - serious shame IMO.

I suspect it's actually to do with an overcrowded timetable, and funding + difficulty getting qualified parents to volunteer to help out.

Hoopdriver

rjsterry wrote:

SimonAH wrote:

Agent57 wrote:

What is it with people called "Griffin"?

Anyway, I'm a supporter of training for cyclists. Not necessarily compulsory, but I think that aside from the costs and logistics of delivering the training, there aren't really any good arguments against people being trained to use the roads responsibly.

I did my cycling proficiency at school when I was about 8, back in the 70s, and it has seen me through about 35 years of on-road cycling. I'm often appalled at the way some other people ride, and to be honest I'm not surprised some motorists get irate at cyclists.

Ideally, all school-age children would have an opportunity to have cycling training at school; preferably junior school. And if we could persuade more adults to do something like Bikeability, so much the better.

Couldn't agree more, but most junior schools have dropped cycle training due to liability issues - serious shame IMO.

I suspect it's actually to do with an overcrowded timetable, and funding + difficulty getting qualified parents to volunteer to help out.

+1 on that.

I volunteered to help at our school, and am qualified, plus I have also been CID checked since i already regularly come in and give lectures to the kids about various topics. I figured I was a shoe-in and the Bikeability folks were keen to have me, but alas I could not do cycle training for them without a huge amount of hassles because the council boffins decided I needed to get police clearances from Australia and the US since I had lived in both those countries as well ( I grew up in the US MORE THAN 30 years ago!) I am squeaky clean but it all became such a tortuous bureaucratic nighmare, taking months and requiring multiple trips to embassies etc - all for what amounted to essentially a volunteer thing (small payment) - that I eventually just said the heck with it.

Funnily enough, I can still go in the lecture at our local school, where my kids go, and indeed I will be again on Wednesday, but I can't do cycle training!

Agent57

Hoopdriver wrote:

the council boffins decided I needed to get police clearances from Australia and theUS as well since I had lived in both those countries as well ( as a child in theUS MORE THAN 30 years ago!)

I coach at a Go-Ride club (6-18 years old), but luckily for me the CRB check by British Cycling for my coaching certificate only had to be done with the UK authorities. I dread to think how long it might have taken if they'd decided I needed police clearance from Guyana, where I lived for a while as a child.

I've considered training as a Bikeability instructor as well (about £600 IIRC), but one problem I'd have is that I'm just not available to go into schools during their day, as I've got my own full-time job. Even after school is a non-starter for me, unfortunately, as I work in another town and don't get back to Lancaster until around 7:30pm.