Today's Forum Topics
Set as homepage
|
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
 |
|
|||||||
| |
||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
29-06.-2008, 06:10 PM
|
#121 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: And make no mistake, cyclists are criminals.
NewRiderPS <rider01@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 19:37:07 +0100, Danny Colyer > <danny_colyer@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >On 28/06/2008 14:28, NewRiderPS wrote: > >>> I won't condone red light jumping by cyclists as long as it's illegal, > >>> but I don't believe that it /should/ be illegal. I believe that a red > >>> light should be equivalent to a "Give Way" sign for cyclists (and that > >>> includes giving way to pedestrians). > >> > >> I would respectfully disagree. I think that stop _signs_ should be the > >> equivalent for 'give way', but not stop _lights_. > > > >Erm, no. That's what "Give Way" signs are for. "Stop" signs are for > >stopping at. Neither will solve the problem of crossing or turning onto > >a major road from a minor road when there is heavy traffic on the major > >road. Traffic lights, whether they mean "Give Way" or "Stop", solve > >that problem. > > Can you read? I said I THINK, as in it is my opinion that...stop signs > SHOULD be deemed as give way for bicyclists. Where I live there are > numerous cities where this is so. It probably would be a reasonable > practice in the area where you are, at least in residential areas. Do > you ride a bike? If so would you stop at a stop sign leading to a dead > end street with no cars in sight? If so, then why criminalize such > activities?. Stop signs are typically located at junctions where it would be dangerous not to stop and carefully look for traffic. I know of no stop signs leading to dead end streets where I would be able to check that no cars were about without stopping. Indeed, I know of no stop signs leading to dead end streets. Please remember, this is uk.rec.cycling. Cheers, Luke -- Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk> |
|
|
29-06.-2008, 06:15 PM
|
#122 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: And make no mistake, cyclists are criminals.
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 10:10:25 +0100
notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com (Ekul Namsob) wrote: > Please remember, this is uk.rec.cycling. > Do you think he knows what the 'uk' stands for? |
|
|
|
29-06.-2008, 06:30 PM
|
#123 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: And make no mistake, cyclists are criminals.
On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 15:16:05 -0400, NewRiderPS <rider01@verizon.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 19:37:07 +0100, Danny Colyer > <danny_colyer@hotmail.com> wrote: > > >On 28/06/2008 14:28, NewRiderPS wrote: > >> > >> I would respectfully disagree. I think that stop _signs_ should be the > >> equivalent for 'give way', but not stop _lights_. > > > >Erm, no. That's what "Give Way" signs are for. "Stop" signs are for > >stopping at. Neither will solve the problem of crossing or turning onto > >a major road from a minor road when there is heavy traffic on the major > >road. Traffic lights, whether they mean "Give Way" or "Stop", solve > >that problem. > > Can you read? That's an interesting application of 'respectfully'. > I said I THINK, as in it is my opinion that...stop signs SHOULD be > deemed as give way for bicyclists. Where I live there are numerous > cities where this is so. It probably would be a reasonable practice > in the area where you are, at least in residential areas. Do you > ride a bike? If so would you stop at a stop sign leading to a dead > end street with no cars in sight? If so, then why criminalize such > activities?. I think you should bear in mind that this is a UK group, and it is apparent from your description that you don't know (or possibly are ignoring) how a stop sign is employed on UK roads in accordance with UK law. It would not be a reasonable practice here in the UK. It does not make sense for a stop sign (as employed in the UK, the area of discussion of this UK group) to be treated as a give way by any vehicle. Further, your scenario cannot occur if the stop sign is employed as it is supposed to be employed. regards, Ian SMith -- |\ /| no .sig |o o| |/ \| |
|
|
|
29-06.-2008, 06:32 PM
|
#124 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: And make no mistake, cyclists are criminals.
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008, Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 10:10:25 +0100 > notmyaddress.1.ekulnamsob@wronghead.com (Ekul Namsob) wrote: > > > Please remember, this is uk.rec.cycling. > > > Do you think he knows what the 'uk' stands for? Well, we had someone on the group once that thought it was 'university of kentucky' or something. He did at least apologise upon discovering it was a whole different country... regards, Ian SMith -- |\ /| no .sig |o o| |/ \| |
|
|
|
29-06.-2008, 06:44 PM
|
#125 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Re: And make no mistake, cyclists are criminals.
On 28/06/2008 22:44, Tom Crispin wrote:
> I think that allowing cyclists to proceed at lights when they feel it > is safe to do so should be the exception, not the rule. Pedestrian > lights and certain other lights, especially left turns and ahead > opposite a T junction could easily be fitted with an orange flashing > cycle only light meaning "Cyclists only may proceed with caution". It would have to be distinct from the existing flashing amber phase at pedestrian crossings. My first thought on reading this was that it would be expensive to implement, as sets of lights would need to be replaced. Thinking about it, though, it occurred to me that the typical lifetime of a set of lights round here seems to be about 4 years. If that's typical of the rest of the country then it wouldn't take long to replace those that would need replacing. > At major junctions cyclists should be made to obey lights. It certainly wouldn't be difficult to argue a case for different rules at different junctions, and an additional signal would be a good way to achieve that. I like your thinking. -- Danny Colyer <http://www.redpedals.co.uk> Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often "The plural of anecdote is not data" - Frank Kotsonis |
|
|
Linear Mode
