David Hansen gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

You'll note I didn't say rid of _all_ TrafPol. Just the vast majority.

That may or may not be the case down south. However, in this country the
figures I have seen indicated that this was not the case.

Umm, you're in the same country I am - and by "down south", I presume
you're meaning the portion of that country which houses somewhere more
than 90% of the population of the country?

Adrian wrote:
David Hansen gurgled happily,
sounding much like they were saying:

You'll note I didn't say rid of _all_ TrafPol. Just the vast
majority.

That may or may not be the case down south. However, in this country
the figures I have seen indicated that this was not the case.

Umm, you're in the same country I am - and by "down south", I presume
you're meaning the portion of that country which houses somewhere more
than 90% of the population of the country?

Errrr, not if he's in Edinburgh. That's in a different country to where you
say you live (somewhere on the outer reaches of the (sadly truncated)
Metropolitan Railway IIRC).

"Brimstone" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

That may or may not be the case down south. However, in this country
the figures I have seen indicated that this was not the case.

Umm, you're in the same country I am - and by "down south", I presume
you're meaning the portion of that country which houses somewhere more
than 90% of the population of the country?

Errrr, not if he's in Edinburgh. That's in a different country to where
you say you live (somewhere on the outer reaches of the (sadly
truncated) Metropolitan Railway IIRC).

Funny. I thought both were definitely in the United Kingdom.

In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

This no doubt also explains the cyclist who tried to kill me as I was
getting off a bus a coupla weeks ago. They spend so much time looking
for people who are *trying* to kill them (of whom there are
approximately zero) that they don't bother to look out for people who
might accidentally kill them (most drivers), people who might kill them
because the cyclist did something stupid (the driver of that artic), or
people who they might kill (me).

You can't spend much time cycling in London if you think that, then.

On every visit to London I can guarantee you I will pass at least one taxi
stopped in a cycle advance stop box as well as several motorbikes. I've
had my ration of both already and I'm not going back to Cambridge till
tomorrow afternoon. The motorbikes problem has been made worse by Boris
allowing them in his bus lanes.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(David Cantrell) wrote:

very few car drivers jump red lights, fewer do it deliberately, and
fewer still do it regularly. Which is really rather different from
cyclists, at least in London.

You are joking! I will concede that cyclists ignore lights more often than
motorists do but otherwise you are deluded.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article ,
(Tony Dragon) wrote:

I do agree about "driving like a wazzock", "driving like a complete
tit","driving like an utterly selfish *******" go largely unremarked
and almost entirely prosecuted.
I am sure that you meant this comment to apply to all road users.

I believe the actual offence is driving without due consideration for
other road users. I think it also applies to riders (e.g. cyclists).

But what about pedestrians? A silly woman stopped in the road in front of
me this morning near the British Museum, exactly on top of a painted cycle
symbol and blocking the gap between two bollards marking the start of the
cycle route I was entering. I rang my bell as I approached. She just
smiled sweetly. Eventually it dawned on her to think where she was and
stand somewhere else in the middle of the road. Grrr!

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In article , (Daniel Barlow)
wrote:

Tony Dragon writes:

Cyclist, mandatory cycle lane, do the two things go together?

A mandatory cycle lane is a lane in which other types of vehicle are not
allowed, and is marked by a solid white line at its edge. As distinct
from the other kind ("discretionary?" "optional?" can't remember the
word) which has a dashed line and in which you are allowed to drive if
you feel like it.

"Advisory" is the word you were searching for. The signs by the side of
the road are different too.

I'm not particularly wild about the idea as they will inevitably be
painted in the gutter and so encourage gutter cycling. I do wonder,
though, if the planned law changes for ASLs (to make it legal for cycles
to enter the reservoir without using the suicide lane) could also be
used to permit left-turn-on-red for cyclists.

If they are an adequate width I don't see the objection myself.

There are some appallingly narrow examples in London though. The worst I
can think of is outside Battersea Dogs' Home which is ludicrously narrow
and has a sunken drain across nearly all of it as well, making it unusable.

But yes you are probably correct, but there should still be a stop
line, other cycles could be using the road.

A "give way" marking would suffice for that.

Or a divided box. There's a new example in Whitehall at the junction with
Parliament Square, though without turn left on red facilities.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Adrian wrote:
"Brimstone" gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying:

That may or may not be the case down south. However, in this
country the figures I have seen indicated that this was not the
case.

Umm, you're in the same country I am - and by "down south", I
presume you're meaning the portion of that country which houses
somewhere more than 90% of the population of the country?

Errrr, not if he's in Edinburgh. That's in a different country to
where you say you live (somewhere on the outer reaches of the (sadly
truncated) Metropolitan Railway IIRC).

Funny. I thought both were definitely in the United Kingdom.

They are, but Sotland and England are different countries. The clue is in
the the fact that they have different names and different legal structures.

"Brimstone" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

That may or may not be the case down south. However, in this country
the figures I have seen indicated that this was not the case.

Umm, you're in the same country I am - and by "down south", I presume
you're meaning the portion of that country which houses somewhere
more than 90% of the population of the country?

Errrr, not if he's in Edinburgh. That's in a different country to
where you say you live (somewhere on the outer reaches of the (sadly
truncated) Metropolitan Railway IIRC).

Funny. I thought both were definitely in the United Kingdom.

They are, but Sotland and England are different countries. The clue is
in the the fact that they have different names and different legal
structures.

Ah, right. So California and Florida are different countries, too?

gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

But what about pedestrians? A silly woman stopped in the road in front
of me this morning near the British Museum, exactly on top of a painted
cycle symbol and blocking the gap between two bollards marking the start
of the cycle route I was entering. I rang my bell as I approached. She
just smiled sweetly. Eventually it dawned on her to think where she was
and stand somewhere else in the middle of the road. Grrr!

Shared-use cycle paths on pavements aren't "out of bounds" to
pedestrians. They're merely available to cyclists as well as pedestrians.
She had as much right to be there as you did.