Jeremy Parker wrote:

A bike lane does encourage traffic jams to line up more neatly,
thereby encouraging cyclists to zip past them on the inside more
quickly. The magic paint provides no protection against cars turning
right through a gap left for them by thoughtful motorists, no
protection from doors being flung open by passengers deciding its
quicker to walk, no protection against killing little old ladies
crossing the street and threading their way through the jam,

You see the cyclist as the victim and the old lady as the problem?

On 12 Jun, 12:30, "John Rowland"
wrote:
You see the cyclist as the victim and the old lady as the problem?

In the situation described, neither party is the "problem". Old ladies
are entitled to cross the road, and cyclists are equally entitled to
make progress along a road if they can. But possibly if each utilized
some care and thought, there needn't be a problem. Ah, sorry, a quick
lapse into utopia - expecting people to *think* is asking too much in
today's society.

Of course, if the streets weren't clogged up with hundreds of empty
taxis going nowhere quickly then there wouldn't be a problem in the
first place.

BRB Class 465.

On 11 Jun, 12:45, Boltar wrote:
Bus stops are pretty visible , even to cyclists. I just don't see the
issue - dont ride up the inside of a bus and you won't get squashed if
they pull over or turn. Whats the problem?

Quite. There needn't be a problem. *However*, buses can and do cut in
front of bicycles, and they also have a habit of stopping alongside
them when they really shouldn't. And whilst I take your point that it
is sometimes possible to ride in a way which prevents this, it simply
isn't always possible if you have a bus driver who takes the line of
"I'm going to do it regardless" (or whatever that is in Urdu), which a
large minority do.

And, no, bus stops are not necessarily "visible". It's far more
important to be looking forwards, at side roads, behind, at the road
surface, what pedestrians are doing, et cetera, and it's very easy to
miss something which shouldn't pose a problem. Like most things on the
roads, if everyone got on with making their own forward progress in a
safe manner in accordance with traffic laws, the road system would
work better for everyone.


BRB Class 465.

On Jun 13, 1:37 am, BRB Class 465 wrote:
On 12 Jun, 12:30, "John Rowland"

wrote:
You see the cyclist as the victim and the old lady as the problem?

In the situation described, neither party is the "problem". Old ladies
are entitled to cross the road, and cyclists are equally entitled to
make progress along a road if they can. But possibly if each utilized
some care and thought, there needn't be a problem. Ah, sorry, a quick
lapse into utopia - expecting people to *think* is asking too much in
today's society.

Of course, if the streets weren't clogged up with hundreds of empty
taxis going nowhere quickly then there wouldn't be a problem in the
first place.

BRB Class 465.



With a bendy bus parked across a pedestrian crossing, assuming that
the little old lady can guess that the green man must be lit, she has
to walk several metres along the road as well as across it in order to
get round the back of the bus, and may well therefore be in the road
some distance from a crossing, where a cyclist is reasonably paying
more attention to the red light ahead.

Taxis on the other hand don't require such a long walk and cause less
of a blockage. You can also see over the top of them.

On 13 Jun, 01:37, BRB Class 465 wrote:
Of course, if the streets weren't clogged up with hundreds of empty
taxis going nowhere quickly then there wouldn't be a problem in the
first place.

Very true. It wouldn't be so bad if they all just parked up somewhere
where tourists and others could find them but they do seem to love
driving in circles causing extra traffic not to mention pollution.

B2003

On 13 Jun, 07:01, MIG wrote:
With a bendy bus parked across a pedestrian crossing, assuming that
the little old lady can guess that the green man must be lit, she has

To be fair its not just buses that do that , trucks seem to make a
habit of it quite often too. Why the drivers think that getting 10
metres ahead 1 minute earlier just to sit in a jam anyway is going to
make the slightest difference to their overall journey beats me.

B2003

Boltar wrote:
On 13 Jun, 01:37, BRB Class 465 wrote:
Of course, if the streets weren't clogged up with hundreds of empty
taxis going nowhere quickly then there wouldn't be a problem in the
first place.

Very true. It wouldn't be so bad if they all just parked up somewhere
where tourists and others could find them but they do seem to love
driving in circles causing extra traffic not to mention pollution.

Taxis are not allowed to rank (singly or in groups) anywhere except at
marked ranks.

On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 01:16:55AM -0700, Boltar wrote:
On 13 Jun, 01:37, BRB Class 465 wrote:
Of course, if the streets weren't clogged up with hundreds of empty
taxis going nowhere quickly then there wouldn't be a problem in the
first place.
Very true. It wouldn't be so bad if they all just parked up somewhere
where tourists and others could find them but they do seem to love
driving in circles causing extra traffic not to mention pollution.

Is it beyond what passes for your brane to imagine that they might have
just set down a passenger and be heading towards places where they know
there are people who want a taxi? If you really think that they're
driving aimlessly, burning their expensive fuel for the sole purpose of
annoying people, then you are the biggest idiot in London.

--
David Cantrell | Godless Liberal Elitist

Nuke a disabled unborn gay baby whale for JESUS!

On 14 Jun, 11:04, David Cantrell wrote:
Is it beyond what passes for your brane to imagine that they might have
just set down a passenger and be heading towards places where they know
there are people who want a taxi? If you really think that they're
driving aimlessly, burning their expensive fuel for the sole purpose of
annoying people, then you are the biggest idiot in London.

Whether the purpose is to annoy people isn't really the point, but it
certainly has that effect. I don't understand why London has - rightly
- clamped down on users of private cars in the congested area, but has
done little to reduce the volume of taxis on the streets, who cause
far more non-necessary pollution because they're running around empty
for much of the time, quite apart from taking up road-space, causing
noise, et cetera.

BRB Class 465 typed

Whether the purpose is to annoy people isn't really the point, but it
certainly has that effect. I don't understand why London has - rightly
- clamped down on users of private cars in the congested area, but has
done little to reduce the volume of taxis on the streets, who cause
far more non-necessary pollution because they're running around empty
for much of the time, quite apart from taking up road-space, causing
noise, et cetera.

Taxis don't run empty for long. In the suburbs many are on radio schemes
and in the cetre they get swooped by predatory passengers like me PDQ.

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.