Cycling wrong way up one way streets to be made legal

POHB

or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/207...ay-streets.html

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/to...icle4061323.ece

There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.

Nick

POHB wrote:
> or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/207...ay-streets.html
>
> http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/to...icle4061323.ece
>
> There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
> this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.

That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.

Colin Blackburn

Nick wrote:
> POHB wrote:
>> or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>>
>> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/207...ay-streets.html
>>
>>
>> http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/to...icle4061323.ece
>>
>>
>> There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
>> this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.
>
> That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
> that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
> law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
> it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.

I heard the Today piece on R4. The guy from the CTC took a moderate
pragmatic line. Tiff Needell (sp?), arguing against, was a typical
racing driver. He talked of the danger of closing speeds of 40 or 50mph.
The CTC guy had to point out that on the sort of roads in the trial cars
were travelling more slowly than bikes!

Colin

Dave Larrington

In news:6an35eF37hneuU1@mid.individual.net,
Colin Blackburn <news@ximenes.org.uk> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:

> I heard the Today piece on R4. The guy from the CTC took a moderate
> pragmatic line. Tiff Needell (sp?), arguing against, was a typical
> racing driver. He talked of the danger of closing speeds of 40 or
> 50mph. The CTC guy had to point out that on the sort of roads in the
> trial cars were travelling more slowly than bikes!

I also heard it, and Needell came across as a total berk. All the evidence
suggests that he /is/ a total berk, though, so this was not entirely
unexpected.

However, I think this idea is craptacular in the extreme.

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle
than for Gary Busey to pass through the eye of a camel.

Nick

Dave Larrington wrote:
> In news:6an35eF37hneuU1@mid.individual.net,
> Colin Blackburn <news@ximenes.org.uk> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
>
>> I heard the Today piece on R4. The guy from the CTC took a moderate
>> pragmatic line. Tiff Needell (sp?), arguing against, was a typical
>> racing driver. He talked of the danger of closing speeds of 40 or
>> 50mph. The CTC guy had to point out that on the sort of roads in the
>> trial cars were travelling more slowly than bikes!
>
> I also heard it, and Needell came across as a total berk. All the evidence
> suggests that he /is/ a total berk, though, so this was not entirely
> unexpected.
>
> However, I think this idea is craptacular in the extreme.
>
I was listening to Jo Goode on radio London. The guy I heard was from
the council. Obviously he wasn't trained in politics or talking on the
radio as he came across as a reasonable person.

Mark

On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:27:49 -0700 (PDT), POHB <google@hayward.uk.net>
wrote:

>or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>
>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/207...ay-streets.html
>
>http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/to...icle4061323.ece
>
>There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
>this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.

Seems to have stirred up the anti cycle brigade into even more mouth
foaming comments.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

spindrift

On Jun 4, 11:14*am, Mark <i...@getlotsofspamthankstoplus.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:27:49 -0700 (PDT), POHB <goo...@hayward.uk.net>
> wrote:
>
> >or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>
> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/207...ed-wrong-way-up...
>
> >http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/to...iving/news/arti...
>
> >There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
> >this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.
>
> Seems to have stirred up the anti cycle brigade into even more mouth
> foaming comments.
>
> --
> (\__/) *M.
> (='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
> (")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
> posted from there. *If you wish your postings to be seen by
> everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
> Seehttp://improve-usenet.org

Why in the name of left-handed Greek buggery have they asked "Captain
Gatso" to comment?


http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol...Submitted=true

David Hansen

On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:27:49 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be POHB
<google@hayward.uk.net> wrote this:-

>or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London. [snip]
>
>There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
>this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.

There have been streets like this in Edinburgh for years. Most are
quiet streets with not many vehicles. They are not one-way, they are
two-way but with motorists prohibited from entering at one end. The
only signs that I have noticed are the entry restrictions at one
end. There is an island at that end, though the idiots who came up
with the streetscape manual wanted to remove these as they claimed
they were not good looking. There is an official name for this sort
of thing, something like a motor vehicle plug. There are one or two
streets which are busier, one-way for motorists and two-way for
cyclists. These have extensive signs, paint and so on.

Both are generally no great problem for cyclists, though some
motorists appear as idiotic as some television presenters.

I have seen similar streets in other towns.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen

On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 10:09:47 +0100 someone who may be "Dave
Larrington" <smert.spamionam@privacy.net> wrote this:-

>I also heard it, and Needell came across as a total berk.

Indeed. He spoke of "splatting a cyclist" and this was not
questioned by the presenter. I wonder if they would have done the
same thing had a guest spoken of "splatting a politician",
"splatting a pedestrian", "splatting a journalist" and so on. I
suspect that in such a case the presenter would have immediately
intervened to ask the guest to withdraw the remark and made a big
issue of it.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

google@woodall.me.uk

On Jun 4, 9:27 am, POHB <goo...@hayward.uk.net> wrote:
> or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/207...ed-wrong-way-up...
>
> http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/to...iving/news/arti...
>
> There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
> this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.

While there are some one way streets that you might need to cycle up
but then have to make a huge detour to get back to the other end e.g
High Street here:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&h...2,0.007038&z=17

in the majority of cases it isn't really a problem and if worst comes
to worst you can always get off and walk.

But why can't the politicians do something about pedal reflectors re
clipless pedals and recumbents? It's akin to still not having changed
the law prohibiting more than a few pints of petrol being kept in a
container to exclude car fuel tanks.

Tim.

Sir Jeremy

On 4 Jun, 09:47, Colin Blackburn <n...@ximenes.org.uk> wrote:
> Nick wrote:
> > POHB wrote:
> >> or at least to be trialled on a few roads in part of London.
>
> >>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/207...ed-wrong-way-up...
>
> >>http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/to...iving/news/arti...
>
> >> There's several streets around my way with cycle contraflow lanes,
> >> this just sounds like trying to save a bit of money on white paint.
>
> > That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
> > that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
> > law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
> > it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.
>
> I heard the Today piece on R4. The guy from the CTC took a moderate
> pragmatic line. Tiff Needell (sp?), arguing against, was a typical
> racing driver. He talked of the danger of closing speeds of 40 or 50mph.
> The CTC guy had to point out that on the sort of roads in the trial cars
> were travelling more slowly than bikes!
>
> Colin- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

A closing speed of 40mph wouldn't be unreasonable

Dervin

On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:40:19 +0100, Nick wrote:
> That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
> that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
> law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
> it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.

So why is pot still illegal?

Nick

Dervin wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 09:40:19 +0100, Nick wrote:
>> That seems sensible. They had a guy on the radio discussing it. He said
>> that cyclists were already doing it. He also said that when you have a
>> law that is widely disobeyed without any obvious negative consequences
>> it is sensible to consider if the law is really needed.
>
> So why is pot still illegal?

As I said this guy was clearly not trained in politics.

But AIUI one puff of cannabis turns you into a Heroin addict which
requires you to mug old women in order to get money for your next fix. I
imagine it also makes you into a paedophile too.

Well Skunk does, obviously its completely different from the weed we
smoked when we were kids.

Just zis Guy, you know?

On Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:57:56 GMT, Dervin <Dervin@Dervin.Dervin> said
in <ojw1k.145660$cZ3.72949@newsfe10.ams2>:

>So why is pot still illegal?

Because it is racist. It's forever accusing the kettle of being
black.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound