LCC - Space for cycling protest Mon 2nd Sept (London)

unclejimbo1983

Apologies if this is a repost, but I was looking for information on the LCC's protest ride on Monday and couldn't find a dedicated thread on here. It's a short loop past the Palace of Westminster to coincide with the Parliamentary debate on cycling that evening.

I'll be going and it will be my first protest ride. I'm not normally the type, but I'm getting increasingly fed up with the token words and loose change that cycling has been getting recently from the government. It really feels like we are at a turning point where politicians are seeing cycling as a potential vote winner. I think they need to be sent the message that a bit of blue paint here and there is not enough to win our votes.

Anyway, enough of my ramblings. Details (albeit a bit vague) can be found here http://lcc.org.uk/articles/join-our-2-september-space-for-cycling-protest-ride-telling-the-mayor-that-we-need-dedicated-space-for-cycling

cookeeemonster

Yep me and my bro will be attending, should be a good turnout and a great atmosphere I reckon. Nice and central for everyone to meet too!

greg66_tri_v2.0

Hmm. Is this going to hold me up on my ride home? If so, boooo!

rjsterry

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

Hmm. Is this going to hold me up on my ride home? If so, boooo!

6 for 6.30 start.

ManiaMuse

I went on the last one which was well attended and had a good atmosphere despite being a bit cold and rainy. It's definitely no Critical Mass style ride if anyone is worried about that - it's well-organised and purposeful and the police are helpful at getting everyone across the big junctions in one group.

Shame no really significant investment in cycling has taken place since the last parliamentary debate though.

Applespider

I'm going. I work at VIctoria, very close to where Dr Katharine Giles was killed by an HGV earlier this year. Since then, nothing has happened at that junction or around any of the rest of the works around there to make life any better for cyclists. My first political ride would have been the vigil for her but her family asked for that not to go ahead.

I believe the idea is that the House of Commons have a cycling debate that evening and with enough people attending the ride, it may get more news coverage than might otherwise be the case and show the depth of feeling for some investment in cycling. If I can come up with something visual and clever re the amount of investment into high speed rail via cycling, I may wear it/attach it to the bike - but not being all that creative, it's unlikely!

If you are riding anywhere nearby at 6ish, please consider joining in. A couple of hours of your time might just help save another cyclist's life in the future.

unclejimbo1983

LCC have confirmed on Twitter that the exact start point is Belvedere Road next to Jubilee Gardens. I imagine it should be pretty easy to find with a thousand or two cyclists milling around, but I thought I'd post anyway. The weather looks to be cooperating too. I'm really looking forward to it now.

mpdouglas

Great - let's antagonise other road users yet again. Strange how the large majority of these protest riders are people I have never come across in the 2 years of daily cycling into and out of central London.

LCC keep demanding change from government yet appear to channel not once ounce of energy into getting our own house in order. Here's their ever so tough stance on jumping red lights (from their website):

"We don't condone illegal cycling, and advise cyclists to obey the Highway Code.

However, we note that cyclists are frequently singled out unfairly for ignoring traffic laws, such as going through red lights, when other road users such as motorists also ignore traffic signals, causing significantly greater risk to other road users, particularly pedestrians.

Often cyclists ignore red lights when there is an 'all-green' pedestrian phase, which tempts them due to the absence of often-intimidating motor traffic to cross the junction.

Cyclists must be aware that this can intimidate pedestrians and can result in collisions."

We may save more cyclists lives by getting the LCC membership to man busy junctions for a couple of hours during rush hour every now and again, pointing out the error of cyclist's ways when they run red lights, mount the pavement, go the wrong way down one way streets, squeeze up the blind side of large vehicles etc, etc. This thought seems not to have crossed the minds of those in charge at LCC. Why would it, that sort of stuff doesn't let you act out the Student Union politics that many of these protest groups seem to really be about.

No-one in these various protest groups seems to have a clue about how you win the hearts and minds of the masses. All they do is demand of others, and give nothing. When they demand safer streets for cyclists - what kind of cyclist do they want the roads to be safe for? Headphone wearing, shopping bag carrying, red light jumping nodders? Until they come and out and state what constitutes acceptable cycling and take a role in enforcing it, why should any other group of road users give a damn about cyclists?

prj45

mpdouglas wrote:

Headphone wearing, shopping bag carrying, red light jumping nodders?

Yes please, the roads should be safe for everybody.

And you can fuck right off if you think red light jumping cyclists are the biggest problem we have.

cookeeemonster

mpdouglas wrote:

Great - let's antagonise other road users yet again. Strange how the large majority of these protest riders are people I have never come across in the 2 years of daily cycling into and out of central London.

LCC keep demanding change from government yet appear to channel not once ounce of energy into getting our own house in order. Here's their ever so tough stance on jumping red lights (from their website):

"We don't condone illegal cycling, and advise cyclists to obey the Highway Code.

However, we note that cyclists are frequently singled out unfairly for ignoring traffic laws, such as going through red lights, when other road users such as motorists also ignore traffic signals, causing significantly greater risk to other road users, particularly pedestrians.

Often cyclists ignore red lights when there is an 'all-green' pedestrian phase, which tempts them due to the absence of often-intimidating motor traffic to cross the junction.

Cyclists must be aware that this can intimidate pedestrians and can result in collisions."

We may save more cyclists lives by getting the LCC membership to man busy junctions for a couple of hours during rush hour every now and again, pointing out the error of cyclist's ways when they run red lights, mount the pavement, go the wrong way down one way streets, squeeze up the blind side of large vehicles etc, etc. This thought seems not to have crossed the minds of those in charge at LCC. Why would it, that sort of stuff doesn't let you act out the Student Union politics that many of these protest groups seem to really be about.

No-one in these various protest groups seems to have a clue about how you win the hearts and minds of the masses. All they do is demand of others, and give nothing. When they demand safer streets for cyclists - what kind of cyclist do they want the roads to be safe for? Headphone wearing, shopping bag carrying, red light jumping nodders? Until they come and out and state what constitutes acceptable cycling and take a role in enforcing it, why should any other group of road users give a damn about cyclists?

Blah blah blah.

Do you even own a bike? Or did you come straight from the daily mail top gear forum???

Seriously get a life. The muppets who give cyclists a bad name are out numbered 1000 to 1 by bad drivers - it's just that speeding, not looking and driving as selfishly as possible is so ingrained in our culture now that they dont even register with people as being utterly wrong.

mpdouglas

Do I own a bike - Yes. 3 at last count and 5,000 miles or so of cycling in the last 12 months (in multiple countries), more than in my car and motorbike added together. Much of it has been commuting into central London. What about you?!

I notice you make no attempt to respond to any of the points I make.

But hey, off you go and join the beardie weirdo/rent a protest mob that usually turn up for these gatherings. Let's see what good it does (other than winding Taxis/Buses/Cars up tighter than a clock spring).

mpdouglas

If you had even bothered to actually think about the points I made before launching into your abusive response, you would realise that I care passionately about cycling and it being safe. But I know that you don't bring about change (in any walk of life) by making demands of the other side whilst making no concession of your own.

Why would a lawmaker or a non-cycling member of the public give a rats ass about implementing change when they see us doing not one single thing to get our own house in order. To them we seem like a bunch of petulant children who demand lots and then ride rough shod over all the bits of the rules that we don't like. And don't tell me I'm exaggerating, every single day of the week I see significant volumes of "cyclists" taking the p155 out of the rules of the road whether it's flaunting one way streets, riding through crossing pedestrians, riding on the pavement etc. When I get grumpy enough to challenge some of these people I get not one ounce of remorse, just a load of indignant abuse (which is presumably what pedestrians get too).

I'll gladly support any cycling lobby group that adopts an adult, balanced approach to bringing about change.

Applespider

The first line you quote says they don't condone illegal cycling and advise following the Highway Code. In addition, they promote events such as the swapping places with HGVs, police cycle marking, cycle training - and help run the feeder rides into events like Skyride etc. They're hardly the rabble rousers that you suggest. Do the AA/RAC/Green Flag take a role in enforcing motoring offenses?

This event isn't a 'Critical Mass' just show up and pedal along. It's been organised along with the police and the route advertised; there is a right to protest in this country for cyclists and any other groups.

As for who might show up, I suspect you might be surprised. I know several cycle commuters from my office are intending to go along who are as far from rent-a-mob as you'd get. However, we'll be sure to get some beards organised for tomorrow if that's a requirement.

cookeeemonster

mpdouglas wrote:

If you had even bothered to actually think about the points I made before launching into your abusive response, you would realise that I care passionately about cycling and it being safe. But I know that you don't bring about change (in any walk of life) by making demands of the other side whilst making no concession of your own.

Why would a lawmaker or a non-cycling member of the public give a rats ass about implementing change when they see us doing not one single thing to get our own house in order. To them we seem like a bunch of petulant children who demand lots and then ride rough shod over all the bits of the rules that we don't like. And don't tell me I'm exaggerating, every single day of the week I see significant volumes of "cyclists" taking the p155 out of the rules of the road whether it's flaunting one way streets, riding through crossing pedestrians, riding on the pavement etc. When I get grumpy enough to challenge some of these people I get not one ounce of remorse, just a load of indignant abuse (which is presumably what pedestrians get too).

I'll gladly support any cycling lobby group that adopts an adult, balanced approach to bringing about change.

I thought about the points you made and thought they were garbage - sorry about that but you expect all cyclists to take the blame for other cyclists that ride badly.

DO YOU MAKE THE SAME DEMAND OF EVEY MOTORIST?????????

BECAUSE LAST YEAR 1900 PEOPLE WERE KILLED BY BAD DRIVING AND 20000 SERIOUSLY INJURED.

Caps lock off. Sorry but your response made me angry, probably too angry, this is the bloody Internet why am I bothering

Anyway, cyclists killed no one and seriously injured a few dozen last year...so really, I'd say the drivers not cyclists need to get their houses in order.

I'm 100% against bad cyclists by the way, but I am in no way responsible for anyone else's actions.

Time to take a chill pill I think

unclejimbo1983

mpdouglas wrote:

If you had even bothered to actually think about the points I made before launching into your abusive response, you would realise that I care passionately about cycling and it being safe. But I know that you don't bring about change (in any walk of life) by making demands of the other side whilst making no concession of your own.

Why would a lawmaker or a non-cycling member of the public give a rats ass about implementing change when they see us doing not one single thing to get our own house in order. To them we seem like a bunch of petulant children who demand lots and then ride rough shod over all the bits of the rules that we don't like. And don't tell me I'm exaggerating, every single day of the week I see significant volumes of "cyclists" taking the p155 out of the rules of the road whether it's flaunting one way streets, riding through crossing pedestrians, riding on the pavement etc. When I get grumpy enough to challenge some of these people I get not one ounce of remorse, just a load of indignant abuse (which is presumably what pedestrians get too).

I'll gladly support any cycling lobby group that adopts an adult, balanced approach to bringing about change.

The "get your own house in order" argument has been used against just about every minority hate group in all of history. It's been a logical fallacy every single time.

When I cycle into work tomorrow I'll go through the junction at the end of Southwark Bridge. There will probably be a tipper truck or a bus blocking the nice wide cycle lane on the left hand side, because the crap road design allows him to be there. If I do make it to the ASL, I'll be passed by a few dicks running the lights whilst I wait.

The crap road design has been pointed out to the authorities time and time again and they can't be arsed to change it. I'm protesting tomorrow because I'm fed up with legitimate safety concerns being brushed under the carpet. If that makes me a "petulant child" because I don't hunt the RLJers like some kind of cycling Batman then so be it.

The LCC are a pressure group, not vigilantes. Personally I'd like them to campaign for more traffic cops in general. That would stop the RLJs and protect me from bad drivers, but I'm not going to sit around on my arse (any longer) and hope the dodgy junctions fix themselves because the LCC has flaws.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Two bullet points from the link in the OP:


Main roads and major junctions need to be made safe for cycling using segregated tracks and cyclist-specific traffic lights to protect people from fast-moving and heavy motor traffic.
Local streets – where people predominantly live and shop – should transformed into spaces that are safe for cycling and walking by removing through motor traffic and reducing its speed.

Do not like.

Koncordski

This is not a thread for a discussion about cyclists jumping red lights. If that's your bag then go to commuting general, plenty of forumites there will indulge you. I'll be going, if anyone is riding over from Canary Wharf and wants to SCR on the way there i'm in.

I'm going for personal reasons, I ride in london everyday and have been lumped into the 'confident cyclist' bucket by TFL. I occasionally have incidents where I'm lucky not to have been killed. Not because i jumped a red light, cycled through a crossing or wore headphones, but because somebody in a motorised vehicle decided not to bother checking if i was there or not. It's bad infrastructure and it's no longer acceptable to do nothing about it or build 100yrd cycle lanes on pavements that dump you at right angles into the road straight before a junction. Many countries in europe see the benefits of encouraging cycling and even New York is doing it. The majority of journeys in a city like london are less than 2 miles, everyone should be able to choose to make that journey by bike (if they want to) and make it safely, without having to wear hi-viz jackets, helmets and have a carbon racing bike.

LCC is not perfect as Greg66 points out above, but the overwhelming push is for better infrastructure and the social benefits of that are worth pursuing. Take a look at how many column inches Eric Pickles can generate with his nonsense about high streets and parking, do we want that to be the dominate news agenda? I don't.

Gallywomack

Yeah, I see it as more of an issue of overall road design, better planning of maintenance works, better provision of safe routes past building sites, and generally a big improvement in our approach to transport. I would also add that the present situation isn't exactly brilliant for motorists either. I can understand the squeamishness about segregated bike lanes - essentially making us all nodders and aiming to add thousands more to the mix - but I tend to think there's a greater good involved that just about trumps my desire to always be able to ride as fast as I like. There's no doubt in my mind that having to share the road with motor vehicles discourages the vast majority of people from cycling. Of course, the important point is whether they are well designed and implemented properly, a half-arsed approach is the worst of all worlds.

Closing local roads to through traffic is already quite a common thing, many town centres have pedestrianised high streets and I tend to think it works quite well from the point of view of creating a pleasant environment. Again, the key is whether there is a well-thought-out intergrated approach that allows through traffic to get to where it needs to go efficiently. Again why this is a bigger issue than just a cycling one.

Anyway, I'm going along tonight.

vermin

I won't be going, as I will be in Chester. I will, however, offer a free Wiggle voucher to the most inventive use of a u-lock on the massive back-pack-ghetto-blaster that invariably accompanies these events.

roger_merriman

vermin wrote:

I won't be going, as I will be in Chester. I will, however, offer a free Wiggle voucher to the most inventive use of a u-lock on the massive back-pack-ghetto-blaster that invariably accompanies these events.

Heh back pack ghetto-blasters are bit like mimes.....

daddy0

I'm going, I was conned into being a marshal. If you cycle in London then you really really should attend this. These people are trying to get things improved for you. I'm not actually a LCC member, and I don't ride through London very much - but my wife is a regular commuter to Victoria, so I hear all the stories about near misses, bad driving, threatening comments, threatening driving etc...

Anything that makes cycling safer has got to be worth supporting.

Saying you don't support an organisation because they don't have a hard enough line on RLJing is a pathetic non-argument.

notsoblue

mpdouglas wrote:

Why would a lawmaker or a non-cycling member of the public give a rats ass about implementing change when they see us doing not one single thing to get our own house in order.

What do you suggest that "we" do to keep "our" own house in order?

vermin

notsoblue wrote:

mpdouglas wrote:

Why would a lawmaker or a non-cycling member of the public give a rats ass about implementing change when they see us doing not one single thing to get our own house in order.

What do you suggest that "we" do to keep "our" own house in order?

I'm as much for vigilantism as the next man, but I can't find a decent pitchfork handlebar mount anywhere on wiggle.

slowbike

Koncordski wrote:

The majority of journeys in a city like london are less than 2 miles, everyone should be able to choose to make that journey by bike (if they want to) and make it safely, without having to wear hi-viz jackets, helmets and have a carbon racing bike.

It's also true "out in the sticks" ... Only last week I got "told off" by colleagues in my office for not wearing a helmet on the sub 1mile ride into town (wearing civvies).
I get the reasons for wearing a helmet - I do wear one most of the time, but I don't see why cyclists should have to protect themselves against (the few) ignorant drivers.

I rode some cyclepaths in Brighton yesterday - the one along the seafront - mostly it was fine - but a number of pedestrians ignored it and wandered across without even glancing. Earlier, on a shared use path there were pedestrians walking up taking the whole width of the path and not moving until the last moment (ok, we weren't travelling fast <10mph). In 40 miles of ride we only had 3 near misses with cars - all 3 passing too close. Oh - and I did have one old dear decide that 4' off my back wheel was a safe distance around a roundabout....

My concern with the "spend money on cycling" argument is that we're going to see lots of inappropriate cyclepaths spring up which do very little to help cyclists cycle. What we really need is for vehicle drivers to have a little more tollerance and respect for their fellow users and for cyclists to have a bit more respect for those vehicle drivers ...
Not quite sure how you could spend money to achieve that though!

cookeeemonster

Slowbike wrote:

My concern with the "spend money on cycling" argument is that we're going to see lots of inappropriate cyclepaths spring up which do very little to help cyclists cycle. What we really need is for vehicle drivers to have a little more tollerance and respect for their fellow users and for cyclists to have a bit more respect for those vehicle drivers ...
Not quite sure how you could spend money to achieve that though!

The point is that they want serious money to build the proper segregated high quality cycle paths that we need to increase cycling rates and make it an option for people who are not young, fit and male. In theory at least they wont be building the crappy cycle lanes that we are used to - they'll be wide, seperated from cars and be rideable for everyone from 8 year olds to 80 year olds. Thats how it works in the netherlands (apparently).

Wont happen for decades if at all but thats what they're pushing for.

Alternatively we can spend a few billion on a couple miles of motorway.

keyser__soze

Koncordski wrote:

I'll be going, if anyone is riding over from Canary Wharf and wants to SCR on the way there i'm in.

What time you heading over? Will try to go but depends if I can get out of work at a reasonable time. Should be able to get out around 6pm as NY are on holiday and that's plenty of time to get to Waterloo for 6.30.

slowbike

CookeeeMonster wrote:

The point is that they want serious money to build the proper segregated high quality cycle paths that we need to increase cycling rates and make it an option for people who are not young, fit and male. In theory at least they wont be building the crappy cycle lanes that we are used to - they'll be wide, seperated from cars and be rideable for everyone from 8 year olds to 80 year olds. Thats how it works in the netherlands (apparently).

Wont happen for decades if at all but thats what they're pushing for.

Alternatively we can spend a few billion on a couple miles of motorway.

I can see how that would be a "quick fix" ... but the flipside is that once you're away from these Cycle Super Highways vehicle drivers still treat you like sh1t - expecting you to ride in the gutter or on shared paths (not advisable if you're going any reasonable speed) ...
The more we segregate cyclists from motorised transport the more the motorised transport drivers will assume they have priority. It's all about perception ... and getting the lazy gits out of their cars!

cookeeemonster

Slowbike wrote:

CookeeeMonster wrote:

The point is that they want serious money to build the proper segregated high quality cycle paths that we need to increase cycling rates and make it an option for people who are not young, fit and male. In theory at least they wont be building the crappy cycle lanes that we are used to - they'll be wide, seperated from cars and be rideable for everyone from 8 year olds to 80 year olds. Thats how it works in the netherlands (apparently).

Wont happen for decades if at all but thats what they're pushing for.

Alternatively we can spend a few billion on a couple miles of motorway.

I can see how that would be a "quick fix" ... but the flipside is that once you're away from these Cycle Super Highways vehicle drivers still treat you like sh1t - expecting you to ride in the gutter or on shared paths (not advisable if you're going any reasonable speed) ...
The more we segregate cyclists from motorised transport the more the motorised transport drivers will assume they have priority. It's all about perception ... and getting the lazy gits out of their cars!

or...they'll be so many more cyclists on the road that they'll personally know many people who cycle (including family) and they'll have to drop their 'cyclists as weirdo minority' opinion?

and due to space being taken away from cars for these lanes (like in the olympics, at least in london) driving will be less appealing and they'd be less private cars clogging up the centre anyway, just those who really need to be there

Koncordski

Keyser__Soze wrote:

Koncordski wrote:

I'll be going, if anyone is riding over from Canary Wharf and wants to SCR on the way there i'm in.

What time you heading over? Will try to go but depends if I can get out of work at a reasonable time. Should be able to get out around 6pm as NY are on holiday and that's plenty of time to get to Waterloo for 6.30.

Should be leaving south quay around 5:30-40 ish, will be going around Westferry circus upper level at 5:45 i suspect.

Applespider

Looks like a good turn out. Several thousand at a conservative estimate and lots still arriving. Quite a few saying this is their first 'protest' ride

Nice crowd - a real mix of bikes, ages, clothes. The beards are outnumbered by some way and where I am is about 30% women. Even the tourists are grabbing 'space for cycling' flags

Gallywomack

Absolutely rubbish.

Worse than L2B for overcrowding, spent most of the time queuing and couldn't get any sustained speed up at all.