wrote:

Except their not out of the way on a cycle path - they're on the road. A bit
of paint doesn't change that.

That's a cycle lane. A cycle path is a segregated track for use by
cyclists (and sometimes pedestrians) only. Google the Milton Keynes
Redways for a UK example.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK. Put first name before the at to reply.

On 24 Jul 2013 12:08:17 GMT
Neil Williams wrote:
wrote:

Except their not out of the way on a cycle path - they're on the road. A bit
of paint doesn't change that.

That's a cycle lane. A cycle path is a segregated track for use by
cyclists (and sometimes pedestrians) only. Google the Milton Keynes
Redways for a UK example.

Fair point. I have no issue with cycle paths, the more the merrier as it
keeps them off the road. Better for all concerned.

--
Spud

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:58:39PM +0000, d wrote:

Fair point. I have no issue with cycle paths, the more the merrier as it
keeps them off the road. Better for all concerned.

Of course, fitting such things into central London is ... well, we have
a special word for it.

That word is "impossible". All the space is already taken up by narrow
pavements and busy roads.

--
David Cantrell | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david

Hail Caesar! Those about to vi ^[ you!

. . . which is why the real way to separate cyclists from other road users is
for cyclists, as much as practicable, to use residential streets and side roads,
and to use main roads only when there is no sensible alternative. Oh, and at
busy junctions for cyclists to dismount and push their bikes.

On 26/07/2013 06:25, Robin9 wrote:
David Cantrell;138034 Wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 12:58:39PM +0000, d
wrote:
-
Fair point. I have no issue with cycle paths, the more the merrier as
it
keeps them off the road. Better for all concerned.-

Of course, fitting such things into central London is ... well, we have
a special word for it.

That word is "impossible". All the space is already taken up by narrow
pavements and busy roads.



. . . which is why the real way to separate cyclists from other road
users is
for cyclists, as much as practicable, to use residential streets and
side roads,
and to use main roads only when there is no sensible alternative. Oh,
and at
busy junctions for cyclists to dismount and push their bikes.

The cyclists aren't usually causing a safety risk to other road users.
It would be safer to insist that motorists push their cars round junctions.


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

My suggestion is practicable. Your - I hope humorous - suggestion is
totally unworkable.

Incidentally, many pedestrians would argue fiercely with your assertion that
cyclists are no danger to others. In London cyclists are loathed more
intensely by pedestrians than by motorists.

On 27/07/2013 10:01, Robin9 wrote:

Incidentally, many pedestrians would argue fiercely with your assertion
that
cyclists are no danger to others. In London cyclists are loathed more
intensely by pedestrians than by motorists.

Lots of people suffer from bizarre and irrational loathing for other
people. I find it is generally best to just ignore such people and get
on with my life.


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:42:34PM +0100, Arthur Figgis wrote:

The cyclists aren't usually causing a safety risk to other road users.

They mostly cause safety risks to themselves*, but also cause safety
risks to pedestrians. I remember with great fondness the time that the
Critical Mass thugs breezed through a red light and tried to run over me
and my blind mother as we were crossing the road.

The only good Critical Masser is one that is in a cell.

* for the ****wits in the audience, safety failures hardly ever have a
single cause. Yes, drivers also cause those risks, but IME of actual
and near accidents, yer average cyclist who is involved in an accident
is more at fault, and even if they aren't at fault, they're still the
ones who, when **** goes wrong, suffer the most. Therefore it behooves
them to do the most to mitigate the risk.

--
David Cantrell | Cake Smuggler Extraordinaire

I caught myself pulling grey hairs out of my beard.
I'm definitely not going grey, but I am going vain.

On 30/07/2013 13:11, David Cantrell wrote:
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:42:34PM +0100, Arthur Figgis wrote:

The cyclists aren't usually causing a safety risk to other road users.

They mostly cause safety risks to themselves*, but also cause safety
risks to pedestrians. I remember with great fondness the time that the
Critical Mass thugs breezed through a red light and tried to run over me
and my blind mother as we were crossing the road.

The only good Critical Masser is one that is in a cell.

* for the ****wits in the audience, safety failures hardly ever have a
single cause. Yes, drivers also cause those risks, but IME of actual
and near accidents, yer average cyclist who is involved in an accident
is more at fault, and even if they aren't at fault, they're still the
ones who, when **** goes wrong, suffer the most. Therefore it behooves
them to do the most to mitigate the risk.

But how far should they go - should they drive instead? Or ride on the
pavement, which lowers the risk of _serious_ injuries to someone, at the
increased(?) risk of _minor_ injuries - as well as being illegal and
massively antisocial?

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Tue, 30 Jul 2013 13:11:05 +0100, David Cantrell
wrote:
... safety failures hardly ever have a
single cause. Yes, drivers also cause those risks, but IME of actual
and near accidents, yer average cyclist who is involved in an accident
is more at fault, and even if they aren't at fault, they're still the
ones who, when **** goes wrong, suffer the most. Therefore it behooves
them to do the most to mitigate the risk.

No. Those who cause the greatest risk to others have the greatest
responsibility to reduce that risk.

Cyclists can make themselves safer, mainly by being more aware of what
drivers are doing around them. The danger still comes overwhelmingly from
the motor vehicles, with a small contribution from poor road surfaces.

In a majority of collisions between cyclists and motor vehicles, police
record the driver as mainly at fault. In collisions between pedestrians
and motor vehicles, the pedestrians are more likely than the drivers to be
blamed. So cyclists are more careful of their own safety than pedestrians
are.

Colin McKenzie

--
Cycling in the UK is about as safe as walking, and helmets don't make it
safer. Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.