Cyclist hurt on new 'bike friendly junction' at Itchen Bridge in Southampton

Daily Echo: Cyclist hurt on new bike friendly junction Cyclist hurt on new bike friendly junction

A CYCLIST has been injured in a collision on a newly-completed junction in Southampton.

The man was knocked off his bike by a car at the Itchen Bridge junction at 8.45am this morning.

The driver of the car, a blue or black Mercedes estate, drove off and the cyclist was treated for minor injuries by paramedics at the scene.

The junction only reopened last Monday after major works to make it more cycle friendly.

It is part of a major £1.7million project to create a cycle highway from Woolston to the city centre.

Police have appealed for anyone with information to contact the Totton Roads Policing Unit on 101.

Comments (135)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:49am Wed 26 Feb 14

wizard says...

Rode it this morning, I felt safer with the old roundabout!
Rode it this morning, I felt safer with the old roundabout! wizard
  • Score: 46

11:52am Wed 26 Feb 14

dand_uk says...

New junction is hardly bike friendly.

If you approach the junction on a green light the design encourages conflict between left turning motor vehicles and people on bikes going straight on. Motors will rush to overtake before they cut left and people on bikes will try to scoot past before the motors with signal on move off.
New junction is hardly bike friendly. If you approach the junction on a green light the design encourages conflict between left turning motor vehicles and people on bikes going straight on. Motors will rush to overtake before they cut left and people on bikes will try to scoot past before the motors with signal on move off. dand_uk
  • Score: 50

12:00pm Wed 26 Feb 14

camerajuan says...

As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant! camerajuan
  • Score: -32

12:14pm Wed 26 Feb 14

dc4306 says...

the changes that have been made on the bridge are ridiculous, there was bound to be an accident. Hope the people involved are not badly hurt
the changes that have been made on the bridge are ridiculous, there was bound to be an accident. Hope the people involved are not badly hurt dc4306
  • Score: 42

12:15pm Wed 26 Feb 14

townieboy says...

No such thing as SAFE anything on the road. Need the utmost care at all times. Dont rely on any cycle lanes or new directions.
No such thing as SAFE anything on the road. Need the utmost care at all times. Dont rely on any cycle lanes or new directions. townieboy
  • Score: 16

12:16pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Dazman67 says...

I cycled over it for the first time this morning, about 15 minutes before this happened. Cycle friendly it isn't. As I approached it, I sensed that exactly this could happen so I hung back until there was an obvious gap in the traffic before proceeding across the junction.
Like 'wizard' says, I was happier with the old roundabout. The safest and most efficient way to cross a junction is to keep your bike or vehicle moving. Traffic lights introduce stopping and starting which in turn increase doubt for road users. Traffic lights and green paint are not the answer. Education is also required. Both for the cyclists and for the motorists. Without education, physical separation for cycles and cars is the only answer. Build a cycle underpass. Put barriers up. But please, no more green paint and traffic lights!
I cycled over it for the first time this morning, about 15 minutes before this happened. Cycle friendly it isn't. As I approached it, I sensed that exactly this could happen so I hung back until there was an obvious gap in the traffic before proceeding across the junction. Like 'wizard' says, I was happier with the old roundabout. The safest and most efficient way to cross a junction is to keep your bike or vehicle moving. Traffic lights introduce stopping and starting which in turn increase doubt for road users. Traffic lights and green paint are not the answer. Education is also required. Both for the cyclists and for the motorists. Without education, physical separation for cycles and cars is the only answer. Build a cycle underpass. Put barriers up. But please, no more green paint and traffic lights! Dazman67
  • Score: 69

12:19pm Wed 26 Feb 14

gilbertratchet says...

camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation. gilbertratchet
  • Score: 14

12:22pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

I hate to say I told you so, BUT I **** WELL TOLD YOU THAT JUNCTION IS DANGEROUS!!!!
I hate to say I told you so, BUT I **** WELL TOLD YOU THAT JUNCTION IS DANGEROUS!!!! Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 15

12:32pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -18

12:32pm Wed 26 Feb 14

camerajuan says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
No, history and statistics are my confirmation. This just adds to it.

Disagree all you like, proof just keeps appearing. On this site and all over the news.
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]No, history and statistics are my confirmation. This just adds to it. Disagree all you like, proof just keeps appearing. On this site and all over the news. camerajuan
  • Score: -7

12:34pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

townieboy wrote:
No such thing as SAFE anything on the road. Need the utmost care at all times. Dont rely on any cycle lanes or new directions.
I won't even use the paint as it was intended, if I ever need to make a right turn, I'll do it the same way as I would in a car.
[quote][p][bold]townieboy[/bold] wrote: No such thing as SAFE anything on the road. Need the utmost care at all times. Dont rely on any cycle lanes or new directions.[/p][/quote]I won't even use the paint as it was intended, if I ever need to make a right turn, I'll do it the same way as I would in a car. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

12:35pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

dc4306 wrote:
the changes that have been made on the bridge are ridiculous, there was bound to be an accident. Hope the people involved are not badly hurt
Agreed.
[quote][p][bold]dc4306[/bold] wrote: the changes that have been made on the bridge are ridiculous, there was bound to be an accident. Hope the people involved are not badly hurt[/p][/quote]Agreed. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 3

12:39pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Micle1974 says...

Well then, that was £1.7 MILLION, plus the stress of all the road works wated then!!!!
This city and its silly ideas of traffic lights and paint!
Well then, that was £1.7 MILLION, plus the stress of all the road works wated then!!!! This city and its silly ideas of traffic lights and paint! Micle1974
  • Score: 34

12:49pm Wed 26 Feb 14

sotonbusdriver says...

When both car drivers and cyclists alike, are always competing to be ahead of each other at roundabouts and junctions, it really doesn't make any difference what you do, they will always clash..

Driving off after knocking someone off is diabolical, and I seriously hope someone got the car details.

To improve the situation, cyclists, need to be seen to ride, properly, not, weaving, on and off the pavement to suit themselves, not ride through red lights, and generally abide by the highway code... And on the same note, car drivers need to be more aware and where possible let the cyclist go, then when the space is there to safely pass, do so, with a good measure of space...

Cyclist often nip down the inside of a queue of cars, and ignore them indicating that they are turning left, then when they disappear in the car blindspot, the car turns and hits them, cyclist do need to read the cars, indicators and position of vehicles, and hang back to cycle on behind the car, and then preserve their own life...
When both car drivers and cyclists alike, are always competing to be ahead of each other at roundabouts and junctions, it really doesn't make any difference what you do, they will always clash.. Driving off after knocking someone off is diabolical, and I seriously hope someone got the car details. To improve the situation, cyclists, need to be seen to ride, properly, not, weaving, on and off the pavement to suit themselves, not ride through red lights, and generally abide by the highway code... And on the same note, car drivers need to be more aware and where possible let the cyclist go, then when the space is there to safely pass, do so, with a good measure of space... Cyclist often nip down the inside of a queue of cars, and ignore them indicating that they are turning left, then when they disappear in the car blindspot, the car turns and hits them, cyclist do need to read the cars, indicators and position of vehicles, and hang back to cycle on behind the car, and then preserve their own life... sotonbusdriver
  • Score: 45

12:51pm Wed 26 Feb 14

bigfella777 says...

dand_uk wrote:
New junction is hardly bike friendly.

If you approach the junction on a green light the design encourages conflict between left turning motor vehicles and people on bikes going straight on. Motors will rush to overtake before they cut left and people on bikes will try to scoot past before the motors with signal on move off.
That's exactly what I have found, it's terrifying to be honest, people are so stupid that they would risk injuring a cyclist just so that they turn left quicker just so they can can sit in a queue in Royal Crescent rd, I men what do they think they are going to gain by it?
If this was a hit and run it should be treated as severely as it would be if a pedestrian was involved , it just about sums it up that motorists think cyclists are so insignificant that they can just drive away from an accident.
[quote][p][bold]dand_uk[/bold] wrote: New junction is hardly bike friendly. If you approach the junction on a green light the design encourages conflict between left turning motor vehicles and people on bikes going straight on. Motors will rush to overtake before they cut left and people on bikes will try to scoot past before the motors with signal on move off.[/p][/quote]That's exactly what I have found, it's terrifying to be honest, people are so stupid that they would risk injuring a cyclist just so that they turn left quicker just so they can can sit in a queue in Royal Crescent rd, I men what do they think they are going to gain by it? If this was a hit and run it should be treated as severely as it would be if a pedestrian was involved , it just about sums it up that motorists think cyclists are so insignificant that they can just drive away from an accident. bigfella777
  • Score: 7

12:59pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

sotonbusdriver wrote:
When both car drivers and cyclists alike, are always competing to be ahead of each other at roundabouts and junctions, it really doesn't make any difference what you do, they will always clash..

Driving off after knocking someone off is diabolical, and I seriously hope someone got the car details.

To improve the situation, cyclists, need to be seen to ride, properly, not, weaving, on and off the pavement to suit themselves, not ride through red lights, and generally abide by the highway code... And on the same note, car drivers need to be more aware and where possible let the cyclist go, then when the space is there to safely pass, do so, with a good measure of space...

Cyclist often nip down the inside of a queue of cars, and ignore them indicating that they are turning left, then when they disappear in the car blindspot, the car turns and hits them, cyclist do need to read the cars, indicators and position of vehicles, and hang back to cycle on behind the car, and then preserve their own life...
"weaving" is called filtering which motorcyclists also do, I agree about the pavement to a point because some shared paths, you hae no choice but to rejoin the road, I also agree about the red light thing and most do abide by the highway code, as for "nipping dow the inside", look what else is on the inside, it's the bloody cycle lane and it's hard to know if someone will be turning left if they don't indicate.
[quote][p][bold]sotonbusdriver[/bold] wrote: When both car drivers and cyclists alike, are always competing to be ahead of each other at roundabouts and junctions, it really doesn't make any difference what you do, they will always clash.. Driving off after knocking someone off is diabolical, and I seriously hope someone got the car details. To improve the situation, cyclists, need to be seen to ride, properly, not, weaving, on and off the pavement to suit themselves, not ride through red lights, and generally abide by the highway code... And on the same note, car drivers need to be more aware and where possible let the cyclist go, then when the space is there to safely pass, do so, with a good measure of space... Cyclist often nip down the inside of a queue of cars, and ignore them indicating that they are turning left, then when they disappear in the car blindspot, the car turns and hits them, cyclist do need to read the cars, indicators and position of vehicles, and hang back to cycle on behind the car, and then preserve their own life...[/p][/quote]"weaving" is called filtering which motorcyclists also do, I agree about the pavement to a point because some shared paths, you hae no choice but to rejoin the road, I also agree about the red light thing and most do abide by the highway code, as for "nipping dow the inside", look what else is on the inside, it's the bloody cycle lane and it's hard to know if someone will be turning left if they don't indicate. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

1:02pm Wed 26 Feb 14

gilbertratchet says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude. gilbertratchet
  • Score: 8

1:03pm Wed 26 Feb 14

camerajuan says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Jeffy & Al - did you like this post?!?! Be honest!

There can't be others who didn't understand what I said!

MORE confirmation. FURTHER proof. ADDITIONAL fault to the EVER GROWING number of motorist caused incidents.
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Jeffy & Al - did you like this post?!?! Be honest! There can't be others who didn't understand what I said! MORE confirmation. FURTHER proof. ADDITIONAL fault to the EVER GROWING number of motorist caused incidents. camerajuan
  • Score: -8

1:04pm Wed 26 Feb 14

gilbertratchet says...

camerajuan wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
No, history and statistics are my confirmation. This just adds to it.

Disagree all you like, proof just keeps appearing. On this site and all over the news.
It isn't proof. No more than me saying I've never knocked a cyclist off in my life is proof that it doesn't happen. This is magical thinking.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]No, history and statistics are my confirmation. This just adds to it. Disagree all you like, proof just keeps appearing. On this site and all over the news.[/p][/quote]It isn't proof. No more than me saying I've never knocked a cyclist off in my life is proof that it doesn't happen. This is magical thinking. gilbertratchet
  • Score: 5

1:05pm Wed 26 Feb 14

CivicCentered says...

sotonbusdriver wrote:
When both car drivers and cyclists alike, are always competing to be ahead of each other at roundabouts and junctions, it really doesn't make any difference what you do, they will always clash.. Driving off after knocking someone off is diabolical, and I seriously hope someone got the car details. To improve the situation, cyclists, need to be seen to ride, properly, not, weaving, on and off the pavement to suit themselves, not ride through red lights, and generally abide by the highway code... And on the same note, car drivers need to be more aware and where possible let the cyclist go, then when the space is there to safely pass, do so, with a good measure of space... Cyclist often nip down the inside of a queue of cars, and ignore them indicating that they are turning left, then when they disappear in the car blindspot, the car turns and hits them, cyclist do need to read the cars, indicators and position of vehicles, and hang back to cycle on behind the car, and then preserve their own life...
Well said that man...

It appears to me that there is a bit of a cyclist v motorist battle at the moment and it can generally be fixed wtih a little education. I hear an awful lot of "they think they own the road" directed at both parties, but if people were just a bit more aware of their surroundings and other road users we could happily coexist on the roads.

No matter what either side says, there is fault on both sides, but both need to realise that they're putting their lives (or someone elses) at risk by not being safe.

I say this as a cyclist (if anyone cares)
[quote][p][bold]sotonbusdriver[/bold] wrote: When both car drivers and cyclists alike, are always competing to be ahead of each other at roundabouts and junctions, it really doesn't make any difference what you do, they will always clash.. Driving off after knocking someone off is diabolical, and I seriously hope someone got the car details. To improve the situation, cyclists, need to be seen to ride, properly, not, weaving, on and off the pavement to suit themselves, not ride through red lights, and generally abide by the highway code... And on the same note, car drivers need to be more aware and where possible let the cyclist go, then when the space is there to safely pass, do so, with a good measure of space... Cyclist often nip down the inside of a queue of cars, and ignore them indicating that they are turning left, then when they disappear in the car blindspot, the car turns and hits them, cyclist do need to read the cars, indicators and position of vehicles, and hang back to cycle on behind the car, and then preserve their own life...[/p][/quote]Well said that man... It appears to me that there is a bit of a cyclist v motorist battle at the moment and it can generally be fixed wtih a little education. I hear an awful lot of "they think they own the road" directed at both parties, but if people were just a bit more aware of their surroundings and other road users we could happily coexist on the roads. No matter what either side says, there is fault on both sides, but both need to realise that they're putting their lives (or someone elses) at risk by not being safe. I say this as a cyclist (if anyone cares) CivicCentered
  • Score: 28

1:06pm Wed 26 Feb 14

gilbertratchet says...

Earlier today, hundreds of thousands of motorists didn't knock a cyclist off their bike. Further proof that motorists are not the menace.

See how that works?
Earlier today, hundreds of thousands of motorists didn't knock a cyclist off their bike. Further proof that motorists are not the menace. See how that works? gilbertratchet
  • Score: 10

1:07pm Wed 26 Feb 14

tootle says...

I drive a car. Every time I have been over the junction I have gone straight on over central bridge. Less confusing and feels safer. With a couple of road signs and a bit os sense the original junction could have been made perfectly safe, even if not popular merely by making cyclist turn left on and off the bridge(IE go under it if necessary) and no left turn for cars. It might mean more pedal effort for cyclists and more diesel for car drivers but ....................
.. it would seperate the rwo at the point accidents happen(and it would not have cost 1.7 mill)
I drive a car. Every time I have been over the junction I have gone straight on over central bridge. Less confusing and feels safer. With a couple of road signs and a bit os sense the original junction could have been made perfectly safe, even if not popular merely by making cyclist turn left on and off the bridge(IE go under it if necessary) and no left turn for cars. It might mean more pedal effort for cyclists and more diesel for car drivers but .................... .. it would seperate the rwo at the point accidents happen(and it would not have cost 1.7 mill) tootle
  • Score: 18

1:09pm Wed 26 Feb 14

camerajuan says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.
"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up.

"The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.[/p][/quote]"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up. "The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you. camerajuan
  • Score: -4

1:11pm Wed 26 Feb 14

camerajuan says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
Earlier today, hundreds of thousands of motorists didn't knock a cyclist off their bike. Further proof that motorists are not the menace.

See how that works?
Seriously give up, you're utterly missing the point!
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: Earlier today, hundreds of thousands of motorists didn't knock a cyclist off their bike. Further proof that motorists are not the menace. See how that works?[/p][/quote]Seriously give up, you're utterly missing the point! camerajuan
  • Score: -3

1:13pm Wed 26 Feb 14

mickey01 says...

thats money well spent then !!!
thats money well spent then !!! mickey01
  • Score: 13

1:13pm Wed 26 Feb 14

a n o n says...

I also rode it this morning, found myself slowing down to a near stop going through the green light, just incase someone decided to turn left.

It was far, far safer as a roundabout. Not only is it more dangerous to cyclists, the traffic is greater as a roundabout allows more cars safely to use the junction.

The cycle lane 'through' the bus lane is a nightmare too as will cause conflict to people getting on/off the buses.

What a complete waste of money. How has this cost so much?
I also rode it this morning, found myself slowing down to a near stop going through the green light, just incase someone decided to turn left. It was far, far safer as a roundabout. Not only is it more dangerous to cyclists, the traffic is greater as a roundabout allows more cars safely to use the junction. The cycle lane 'through' the bus lane is a nightmare too as will cause conflict to people getting on/off the buses. What a complete waste of money. How has this cost so much? a n o n
  • Score: 18

1:16pm Wed 26 Feb 14

SotonCyclist says...

I was the cyclist behind the poor guy hit off his bike this morning and it was awful to see. We were all being careful and the car just totally cut him up, turned into him, hit him off his bike and drove off. The junction is just dangerous and confusing. Im a cyclist and driver and want it better for everyone. The guy had some head, and arm injuries but was in general ok.Whilst waiting for the Ambulance it happened again, this time cyclist managed to stay on his bike. I realise there will always be accidents but to spend all that money to make something no better is awful.
I was the cyclist behind the poor guy hit off his bike this morning and it was awful to see. We were all being careful and the car just totally cut him up, turned into him, hit him off his bike and drove off. The junction is just dangerous and confusing. Im a cyclist and driver and want it better for everyone. The guy had some head, and arm injuries but was in general ok.Whilst waiting for the Ambulance it happened again, this time cyclist managed to stay on his bike. I realise there will always be accidents but to spend all that money to make something no better is awful. SotonCyclist
  • Score: 42

1:22pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

SotonCyclist wrote:
I was the cyclist behind the poor guy hit off his bike this morning and it was awful to see. We were all being careful and the car just totally cut him up, turned into him, hit him off his bike and drove off. The junction is just dangerous and confusing. Im a cyclist and driver and want it better for everyone. The guy had some head, and arm injuries but was in general ok.Whilst waiting for the Ambulance it happened again, this time cyclist managed to stay on his bike. I realise there will always be accidents but to spend all that money to make something no better is awful.
The you would agree that it's only a matter of time before a cyclist is kiled on that junction?
[quote][p][bold]SotonCyclist[/bold] wrote: I was the cyclist behind the poor guy hit off his bike this morning and it was awful to see. We were all being careful and the car just totally cut him up, turned into him, hit him off his bike and drove off. The junction is just dangerous and confusing. Im a cyclist and driver and want it better for everyone. The guy had some head, and arm injuries but was in general ok.Whilst waiting for the Ambulance it happened again, this time cyclist managed to stay on his bike. I realise there will always be accidents but to spend all that money to make something no better is awful.[/p][/quote]The you would agree that it's only a matter of time before a cyclist is kiled on that junction? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 10

1:24pm Wed 26 Feb 14

gilbertratchet says...

camerajuan wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.
"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up.

"The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.
There are more motorists than cyclists. Simple as that. Call your biased opinion "fact" all you like, but it ain't by any stretch of the imagination actually a fact. Seems you don't know what the words "confirmation" or "fact" actually mean.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.[/p][/quote]"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up. "The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.[/p][/quote]There are more motorists than cyclists. Simple as that. Call your biased opinion "fact" all you like, but it ain't by any stretch of the imagination actually a fact. Seems you don't know what the words "confirmation" or "fact" actually mean. gilbertratchet
  • Score: 3

1:25pm Wed 26 Feb 14

gilbertratchet says...

camerajuan wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
Earlier today, hundreds of thousands of motorists didn't knock a cyclist off their bike. Further proof that motorists are not the menace.

See how that works?
Seriously give up, you're utterly missing the point!
You seem to think that anything that even remotely supports your agenda is stone cold, cast iron proof that you're right. I'll give up on the grounds that you're about as open to discussion as a brick wall, only somewhat less intelligent.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: Earlier today, hundreds of thousands of motorists didn't knock a cyclist off their bike. Further proof that motorists are not the menace. See how that works?[/p][/quote]Seriously give up, you're utterly missing the point![/p][/quote]You seem to think that anything that even remotely supports your agenda is stone cold, cast iron proof that you're right. I'll give up on the grounds that you're about as open to discussion as a brick wall, only somewhat less intelligent. gilbertratchet
  • Score: 3

1:27pm Wed 26 Feb 14

elvisimo says...

Groundhog comments...
Groundhog comments... elvisimo
  • Score: 8

1:28pm Wed 26 Feb 14

RomseyKeith says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure. RomseyKeith
  • Score: 20

1:31pm Wed 26 Feb 14

CivicCentered says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.
"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up. "The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.
There are more motorists than cyclists. Simple as that. Call your biased opinion "fact" all you like, but it ain't by any stretch of the imagination actually a fact. Seems you don't know what the words "confirmation" or "fact" actually mean.
You're both very dull, but I'd say that gilbert is more wrong... not by much though.
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.[/p][/quote]"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up. "The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.[/p][/quote]There are more motorists than cyclists. Simple as that. Call your biased opinion "fact" all you like, but it ain't by any stretch of the imagination actually a fact. Seems you don't know what the words "confirmation" or "fact" actually mean.[/p][/quote]You're both very dull, but I'd say that gilbert is more wrong... not by much though. CivicCentered
  • Score: 4

1:32pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
[quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 4

1:37pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Mr E says...

20 Mph Speed limit (enforced by average speed cameras) for the Itchen bridge coming up in ....3.....2....1....
20 Mph Speed limit (enforced by average speed cameras) for the Itchen bridge coming up in ....3.....2....1.... Mr E
  • Score: 0

1:38pm Wed 26 Feb 14

charrlee says...

Cyclists. I found one in my shed the other day, looking for spanners and screwdrivers. Apparently the smell of oil can attract them, so people with oil-fired central heating had better keep their doors and windows closed or they might find one in their living room!
They are generally harmless-more of a nuisance, if anything. During the mating season they gather in large numbers in places like the New Forest. They are descended from the trainspotter and the anorak, but are much more brightly coloured, and can be found anywhere outside, especially on pavements.
Cyclists. I found one in my shed the other day, looking for spanners and screwdrivers. Apparently the smell of oil can attract them, so people with oil-fired central heating had better keep their doors and windows closed or they might find one in their living room! They are generally harmless-more of a nuisance, if anything. During the mating season they gather in large numbers in places like the New Forest. They are descended from the trainspotter and the anorak, but are much more brightly coloured, and can be found anywhere outside, especially on pavements. charrlee
  • Score: 5

1:39pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Mr E wrote:
20 Mph Speed limit (enforced by average speed cameras) for the Itchen bridge coming up in ....3.....2....1....
Tht's a good idea, I've cycled down either side at 30mph+ and still had cars catch up to sit on my back wheel before.
[quote][p][bold]Mr E[/bold] wrote: 20 Mph Speed limit (enforced by average speed cameras) for the Itchen bridge coming up in ....3.....2....1....[/p][/quote]Tht's a good idea, I've cycled down either side at 30mph+ and still had cars catch up to sit on my back wheel before. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

1:41pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

charrlee wrote:
Cyclists. I found one in my shed the other day, looking for spanners and screwdrivers. Apparently the smell of oil can attract them, so people with oil-fired central heating had better keep their doors and windows closed or they might find one in their living room!
They are generally harmless-more of a nuisance, if anything. During the mating season they gather in large numbers in places like the New Forest. They are descended from the trainspotter and the anorak, but are much more brightly coloured, and can be found anywhere outside, especially on pavements.
Think you meant, "especially found in cafe's drinking coffee and eating cake".
[quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Cyclists. I found one in my shed the other day, looking for spanners and screwdrivers. Apparently the smell of oil can attract them, so people with oil-fired central heating had better keep their doors and windows closed or they might find one in their living room! They are generally harmless-more of a nuisance, if anything. During the mating season they gather in large numbers in places like the New Forest. They are descended from the trainspotter and the anorak, but are much more brightly coloured, and can be found anywhere outside, especially on pavements.[/p][/quote]Think you meant, "especially found in cafe's drinking coffee and eating cake". Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 6

1:44pm Wed 26 Feb 14

camerajuan says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.
"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up.

"The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.
There are more motorists than cyclists. Simple as that. Call your biased opinion "fact" all you like, but it ain't by any stretch of the imagination actually a fact. Seems you don't know what the words "confirmation" or "fact" actually mean.
Jesus! Keep it up! Seriously!

Yes there are more motorists than cyclists. Not now nor have I ever disputed that FACT. However, the FACT remains that motorists cause more accidents than cyclists, regardless of how many there are. Show me proof they don't.
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.[/p][/quote]"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up. "The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.[/p][/quote]There are more motorists than cyclists. Simple as that. Call your biased opinion "fact" all you like, but it ain't by any stretch of the imagination actually a fact. Seems you don't know what the words "confirmation" or "fact" actually mean.[/p][/quote]Jesus! Keep it up! Seriously! Yes there are more motorists than cyclists. Not now nor have I ever disputed that FACT. However, the FACT remains that motorists cause more accidents than cyclists, regardless of how many there are. Show me proof they don't. camerajuan
  • Score: 3

1:46pm Wed 26 Feb 14

jetsstar says...

Oh god people. This is the Daily Echo not the Daily Mail. Drivers are people, cyclists are people, drivers are cyclists, cyclists are drivers. Some are simply awful and aggressive despite their vehicle, some are truly polite and make me smile some days. We should be commenting on constructive ways of making this junction better. I ride it every day and it is simply dangerous and I don't envy the car drivers trying to work out what cyclists are doing because the road layout is ambiguous and tricky. Proper ASLs are the answer here with plenty of time for car drivers to get through the junction and the cyclist to get in the cycle lane on their exit from the junction.
Oh god people. This is the Daily Echo not the Daily Mail. Drivers are people, cyclists are people, drivers are cyclists, cyclists are drivers. Some are simply awful and aggressive despite their vehicle, some are truly polite and make me smile some days. We should be commenting on constructive ways of making this junction better. I ride it every day and it is simply dangerous and I don't envy the car drivers trying to work out what cyclists are doing because the road layout is ambiguous and tricky. Proper ASLs are the answer here with plenty of time for car drivers to get through the junction and the cyclist to get in the cycle lane on their exit from the junction. jetsstar
  • Score: 19

1:58pm Wed 26 Feb 14

From the sidelines says...

camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
That's a massive down-vote you've got there. Does this mean the people of Southampton are cool with hit-and-runs?
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]That's a massive down-vote you've got there. Does this mean the people of Southampton are cool with hit-and-runs? From the sidelines
  • Score: -1

1:59pm Wed 26 Feb 14

charrlee says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
charrlee wrote:
Cyclists. I found one in my shed the other day, looking for spanners and screwdrivers. Apparently the smell of oil can attract them, so people with oil-fired central heating had better keep their doors and windows closed or they might find one in their living room!
They are generally harmless-more of a nuisance, if anything. During the mating season they gather in large numbers in places like the New Forest. They are descended from the trainspotter and the anorak, but are much more brightly coloured, and can be found anywhere outside, especially on pavements.
Think you meant, "especially found in cafe's drinking coffee and eating cake".
Did yuh, Ginger(underscore)cy
clist, did yuh? Did you really think I wrote all that, but actually meant what you said?

Let's see : descended from anorak......brightly coloured.......found on pavements, and..............of moderate to low intelligence, despite being very industrious.

Now did I mean that? Ginger_cyclist, what did I really mean?
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Cyclists. I found one in my shed the other day, looking for spanners and screwdrivers. Apparently the smell of oil can attract them, so people with oil-fired central heating had better keep their doors and windows closed or they might find one in their living room! They are generally harmless-more of a nuisance, if anything. During the mating season they gather in large numbers in places like the New Forest. They are descended from the trainspotter and the anorak, but are much more brightly coloured, and can be found anywhere outside, especially on pavements.[/p][/quote]Think you meant, "especially found in cafe's drinking coffee and eating cake".[/p][/quote]Did yuh, Ginger(underscore)cy clist, did yuh? Did you really think I wrote all that, but actually meant what you said? Let's see : descended from anorak......brightly coloured.......found on pavements, and..............of moderate to low intelligence, despite being very industrious. Now did I mean that? Ginger_cyclist, what did I really mean? charrlee
  • Score: -6

2:00pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ronnie G says...

This is simple. Southampton City Council have given us a 99p version of a super cycle highway. It's not suitable for cyclists or motorists but it meant by scrimping on the costs & design they had more to waste on student tower accommodation. (Amongst other projects)
This is simple. Southampton City Council have given us a 99p version of a super cycle highway. It's not suitable for cyclists or motorists but it meant by scrimping on the costs & design they had more to waste on student tower accommodation. (Amongst other projects) Ronnie G
  • Score: 13

2:04pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

charrlee wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
charrlee wrote:
Cyclists. I found one in my shed the other day, looking for spanners and screwdrivers. Apparently the smell of oil can attract them, so people with oil-fired central heating had better keep their doors and windows closed or they might find one in their living room!
They are generally harmless-more of a nuisance, if anything. During the mating season they gather in large numbers in places like the New Forest. They are descended from the trainspotter and the anorak, but are much more brightly coloured, and can be found anywhere outside, especially on pavements.
Think you meant, "especially found in cafe's drinking coffee and eating cake".
Did yuh, Ginger(underscore)cy

clist, did yuh? Did you really think I wrote all that, but actually meant what you said?

Let's see : descended from anorak......brightly coloured.......found on pavements, and..............of moderate to low intelligence, despite being very industrious.

Now did I mean that? Ginger_cyclist, what did I really mean?
No but apparently it's well known that we sit in cafe's and coffee shops drinking coffee and eating cake.
[quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Cyclists. I found one in my shed the other day, looking for spanners and screwdrivers. Apparently the smell of oil can attract them, so people with oil-fired central heating had better keep their doors and windows closed or they might find one in their living room! They are generally harmless-more of a nuisance, if anything. During the mating season they gather in large numbers in places like the New Forest. They are descended from the trainspotter and the anorak, but are much more brightly coloured, and can be found anywhere outside, especially on pavements.[/p][/quote]Think you meant, "especially found in cafe's drinking coffee and eating cake".[/p][/quote]Did yuh, Ginger(underscore)cy clist, did yuh? Did you really think I wrote all that, but actually meant what you said? Let's see : descended from anorak......brightly coloured.......found on pavements, and..............of moderate to low intelligence, despite being very industrious. Now did I mean that? Ginger_cyclist, what did I really mean?[/p][/quote]No but apparently it's well known that we sit in cafe's and coffee shops drinking coffee and eating cake. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

2:06pm Wed 26 Feb 14

camerajuan says...

From the sidelines wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
That's a massive down-vote you've got there. Does this mean the people of Southampton are cool with hit-and-runs?
Sounds like it! Or at least Gilbert & Jeffian's Crazy Gang are.
[quote][p][bold]From the sidelines[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]That's a massive down-vote you've got there. Does this mean the people of Southampton are cool with hit-and-runs?[/p][/quote]Sounds like it! Or at least Gilbert & Jeffian's Crazy Gang are. camerajuan
  • Score: -5

2:11pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Zexagon says...

Surely the council consulted ginger cyclist and camerajuan before designing this junction? They seem to know everything there is to know about cycling
Surely the council consulted ginger cyclist and camerajuan before designing this junction? They seem to know everything there is to know about cycling Zexagon
  • Score: 4

2:19pm Wed 26 Feb 14

ShirleyLad says...

This is only one incident. To early to tell if it improves or worsens the number of incidents at this Junction. Off course the first incident was going to make the news, afterall this was a highly publised change in road priority. It isn't about cyclist and motorist, as there is an abundance of morons in each camp. I'm just amazed that the driver didn't stop. Hit and run is a criminal offence. I hope the camera on the bridge have recorded his registration. But I expect he didn't stop as he probably has no insurance, tax or MOT.
This is only one incident. To early to tell if it improves or worsens the number of incidents at this Junction. Off course the first incident was going to make the news, afterall this was a highly publised change in road priority. It isn't about cyclist and motorist, as there is an abundance of morons in each camp. I'm just amazed that the driver didn't stop. Hit and run is a criminal offence. I hope the camera on the bridge have recorded his registration. But I expect he didn't stop as he probably has no insurance, tax or MOT. ShirleyLad
  • Score: 9

2:33pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Inform Al says...

CivicCentered wrote:
sotonbusdriver wrote:
When both car drivers and cyclists alike, are always competing to be ahead of each other at roundabouts and junctions, it really doesn't make any difference what you do, they will always clash.. Driving off after knocking someone off is diabolical, and I seriously hope someone got the car details. To improve the situation, cyclists, need to be seen to ride, properly, not, weaving, on and off the pavement to suit themselves, not ride through red lights, and generally abide by the highway code... And on the same note, car drivers need to be more aware and where possible let the cyclist go, then when the space is there to safely pass, do so, with a good measure of space... Cyclist often nip down the inside of a queue of cars, and ignore them indicating that they are turning left, then when they disappear in the car blindspot, the car turns and hits them, cyclist do need to read the cars, indicators and position of vehicles, and hang back to cycle on behind the car, and then preserve their own life...
Well said that man...

It appears to me that there is a bit of a cyclist v motorist battle at the moment and it can generally be fixed wtih a little education. I hear an awful lot of "they think they own the road" directed at both parties, but if people were just a bit more aware of their surroundings and other road users we could happily coexist on the roads.

No matter what either side says, there is fault on both sides, but both need to realise that they're putting their lives (or someone elses) at risk by not being safe.

I say this as a cyclist (if anyone cares)
It's not all cyclists or drivers that are constantly throwing their toys out of the pram, it's just two or three in both camps on this site doing that. Most drivers and most cyclists respect each other.
[quote][p][bold]CivicCentered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonbusdriver[/bold] wrote: When both car drivers and cyclists alike, are always competing to be ahead of each other at roundabouts and junctions, it really doesn't make any difference what you do, they will always clash.. Driving off after knocking someone off is diabolical, and I seriously hope someone got the car details. To improve the situation, cyclists, need to be seen to ride, properly, not, weaving, on and off the pavement to suit themselves, not ride through red lights, and generally abide by the highway code... And on the same note, car drivers need to be more aware and where possible let the cyclist go, then when the space is there to safely pass, do so, with a good measure of space... Cyclist often nip down the inside of a queue of cars, and ignore them indicating that they are turning left, then when they disappear in the car blindspot, the car turns and hits them, cyclist do need to read the cars, indicators and position of vehicles, and hang back to cycle on behind the car, and then preserve their own life...[/p][/quote]Well said that man... It appears to me that there is a bit of a cyclist v motorist battle at the moment and it can generally be fixed wtih a little education. I hear an awful lot of "they think they own the road" directed at both parties, but if people were just a bit more aware of their surroundings and other road users we could happily coexist on the roads. No matter what either side says, there is fault on both sides, but both need to realise that they're putting their lives (or someone elses) at risk by not being safe. I say this as a cyclist (if anyone cares)[/p][/quote]It's not all cyclists or drivers that are constantly throwing their toys out of the pram, it's just two or three in both camps on this site doing that. Most drivers and most cyclists respect each other. Inform Al
  • Score: 12

2:35pm Wed 26 Feb 14

mickey01 says...

make the cyclsits pay to use the bridge that might put a few of the lycra wearing mushroom headed peddlers off
make the cyclsits pay to use the bridge that might put a few of the lycra wearing mushroom headed peddlers off mickey01
  • Score: -9

2:36pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

mickey01 wrote:
make the cyclsits pay to use the bridge that might put a few of the lycra wearing mushroom headed peddlers off
Would we also be making pedestrians, emergency vehicles and bus passengers pay?
[quote][p][bold]mickey01[/bold] wrote: make the cyclsits pay to use the bridge that might put a few of the lycra wearing mushroom headed peddlers off[/p][/quote]Would we also be making pedestrians, emergency vehicles and bus passengers pay? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 4

2:42pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Inform Al says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane. Inform Al
  • Score: 4

2:52pm Wed 26 Feb 14

johnny80 says...

The new junction is apalling and unsafe. I cycle regularly (not as regularly as using my car i hasten to add) and i dont know a single cyclist who even knows how this junction is supposed to work let alone thinks this is an improvement on the old roundabout. As for the comparison to Dutch style junctions thats a complete falsehood. Ductch cycle paths are seperated by curbstones or are on the pavements, they arent green lines on the carriageways. I've just been shown this http://www.southampt
on.gov.uk/Images/Eas
tern%20cycle%20route
%20leaflet-3_tcm46-3
54666.pdf which shows how the council expect cyclists to ignore the highway code method of turn right (ie signalling right, moving to the center of the road and turning right when safe to do so) to this completely ridiculous method of stopping at one set of lights, then right across before turning your bike 90 degrees and waiting at another set of lights to cross the road. its completely crazy and dangerous especially to cyclists from outside the city who wont have a clue what to do.
The new junction is apalling and unsafe. I cycle regularly (not as regularly as using my car i hasten to add) and i dont know a single cyclist who even knows how this junction is supposed to work let alone thinks this is an improvement on the old roundabout. As for the comparison to Dutch style junctions thats a complete falsehood. Ductch cycle paths are seperated by curbstones or are on the pavements, they arent green lines on the carriageways. I've just been shown this http://www.southampt on.gov.uk/Images/Eas tern%20cycle%20route %20leaflet-3_tcm46-3 54666.pdf which shows how the council expect cyclists to ignore the highway code method of turn right (ie signalling right, moving to the center of the road and turning right when safe to do so) to this completely ridiculous method of stopping at one set of lights, then right across before turning your bike 90 degrees and waiting at another set of lights to cross the road. its completely crazy and dangerous especially to cyclists from outside the city who wont have a clue what to do. johnny80
  • Score: 15

2:59pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Brite Spark says...

I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).
I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car). Brite Spark
  • Score: 5

3:04pm Wed 26 Feb 14

gilbertratchet says...

camerajuan wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.
"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up.

"The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.
There are more motorists than cyclists. Simple as that. Call your biased opinion "fact" all you like, but it ain't by any stretch of the imagination actually a fact. Seems you don't know what the words "confirmation" or "fact" actually mean.
Jesus! Keep it up! Seriously!

Yes there are more motorists than cyclists. Not now nor have I ever disputed that FACT. However, the FACT remains that motorists cause more accidents than cyclists, regardless of how many there are. Show me proof they don't.
You're shifting the goalposts. Stop being an idiot.
[quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.[/p][/quote]"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up. "The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.[/p][/quote]There are more motorists than cyclists. Simple as that. Call your biased opinion "fact" all you like, but it ain't by any stretch of the imagination actually a fact. Seems you don't know what the words "confirmation" or "fact" actually mean.[/p][/quote]Jesus! Keep it up! Seriously! Yes there are more motorists than cyclists. Not now nor have I ever disputed that FACT. However, the FACT remains that motorists cause more accidents than cyclists, regardless of how many there are. Show me proof they don't.[/p][/quote]You're shifting the goalposts. Stop being an idiot. gilbertratchet
  • Score: -1

3:05pm Wed 26 Feb 14

vag says...

I had my reservations about this new lay out. I thought I' better not start jumping to any conclusions, and that I would just see how it worked out. unfortunately it seems to have worked out how I'd imagined.
I had my reservations about this new lay out. I thought I' better not start jumping to any conclusions, and that I would just see how it worked out. unfortunately it seems to have worked out how I'd imagined. vag
  • Score: 4

3:16pm Wed 26 Feb 14

elvisimo says...

where is the Geoff59 guy - he normally comes out with some right pearlers?
where is the Geoff59 guy - he normally comes out with some right pearlers? elvisimo
  • Score: 2

3:30pm Wed 26 Feb 14

camerajuan says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.
"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up.

"The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.
There are more motorists than cyclists. Simple as that. Call your biased opinion "fact" all you like, but it ain't by any stretch of the imagination actually a fact. Seems you don't know what the words "confirmation" or "fact" actually mean.
Jesus! Keep it up! Seriously!

Yes there are more motorists than cyclists. Not now nor have I ever disputed that FACT. However, the FACT remains that motorists cause more accidents than cyclists, regardless of how many there are. Show me proof they don't.
You're shifting the goalposts. Stop being an idiot.
Didn't think you could. Thanks for proving it.
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.[/p][/quote]"No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda" - Seriously?? Propaganda?? You call the amount of deaths and injuries to pedestrians, animals, cyclists AND other motorists caused by motorists "cyclist propaganda"?? Wake up. "The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude." - That's irrelevant. Confirmation comes from the stone cold fact that motorists cause more deaths. Show me where that fact falls short of proof that they are a bigger menace than cyclists. I dare you.[/p][/quote]There are more motorists than cyclists. Simple as that. Call your biased opinion "fact" all you like, but it ain't by any stretch of the imagination actually a fact. Seems you don't know what the words "confirmation" or "fact" actually mean.[/p][/quote]Jesus! Keep it up! Seriously! Yes there are more motorists than cyclists. Not now nor have I ever disputed that FACT. However, the FACT remains that motorists cause more accidents than cyclists, regardless of how many there are. Show me proof they don't.[/p][/quote]You're shifting the goalposts. Stop being an idiot.[/p][/quote]Didn't think you could. Thanks for proving it. camerajuan
  • Score: -2

3:33pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Mary80 says...

Brite Spark wrote:
I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).
So damaging her car is somehow justified? Sorry but if it was my car i'd send you the bill ASAP
[quote][p][bold]Brite Spark[/bold] wrote: I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).[/p][/quote]So damaging her car is somehow justified? Sorry but if it was my car i'd send you the bill ASAP Mary80
  • Score: -1

3:41pm Wed 26 Feb 14

elvisimo says...

Mary80 wrote:
Brite Spark wrote:
I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).
So damaging her car is somehow justified? Sorry but if it was my car i'd send you the bill ASAP
read his comment. she drove into him...
[quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brite Spark[/bold] wrote: I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).[/p][/quote]So damaging her car is somehow justified? Sorry but if it was my car i'd send you the bill ASAP[/p][/quote]read his comment. she drove into him... elvisimo
  • Score: 8

3:43pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Mary80 wrote:
Brite Spark wrote:
I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).
So damaging her car is somehow justified? Sorry but if it was my car i'd send you the bill ASAP
She drove into him, he defended himself, self defence is justified.
[quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brite Spark[/bold] wrote: I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).[/p][/quote]So damaging her car is somehow justified? Sorry but if it was my car i'd send you the bill ASAP[/p][/quote]She drove into him, he defended himself, self defence is justified. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 3

3:49pm Wed 26 Feb 14

miltonarcher says...

The solution to all of this conflict is so simple I'm really surprised nobody has thought of it. Either, get everyone into cars, or, everyone onto bikes. Put Bike and Ride car parks outside the city limits if the vote is for the bikes. Or, Bike parks and simply hire electric cars from the Council to get into town centre. So which is better, bikes or cars? There's only one way to find out. FIGHT !!!
The solution to all of this conflict is so simple I'm really surprised nobody has thought of it. Either, get everyone into cars, or, everyone onto bikes. Put Bike and Ride car parks outside the city limits if the vote is for the bikes. Or, Bike parks and simply hire electric cars from the Council to get into town centre. So which is better, bikes or cars? There's only one way to find out. FIGHT !!! miltonarcher
  • Score: -5

3:49pm Wed 26 Feb 14

bigfella777 says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
Exactly right, pedestrians assume they can step into the road and then see if there is a car coming or cross by ear, very dangerous.
It's funny that people assume that if a cyclist hits a pedestrian it's the pedestrian that comes off worse, well not in the accidents of this type that I've seen it's not, because the cyclist tries to avoid them and then loses control/balance and ends up on the deck.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]Exactly right, pedestrians assume they can step into the road and then see if there is a car coming or cross by ear, very dangerous. It's funny that people assume that if a cyclist hits a pedestrian it's the pedestrian that comes off worse, well not in the accidents of this type that I've seen it's not, because the cyclist tries to avoid them and then loses control/balance and ends up on the deck. bigfella777
  • Score: 4

3:57pm Wed 26 Feb 14

RomseyKeith says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
That's also true. I was exiting a side street in Shirley. I was approaching the junction with the high street (so fortunately going slow) when a pedestrian stepped out and nearly hit my bonnet. I hit my brakes and stopped dead (as was so close to the junction I was only doing about 5mph). The pedestrian jumped and then shouted at me.
Whatever happened to the Green Cross Code being taught in schools. (It wouldn't have excused this guy though as he was in his 40s).
When I was in school in the 80s we had cycling profiiciency with highway code, green cross code, and that whole 'be seen' campaign about wearing high-vis gear and using proper lights on your bike.
I cycle and drive. I have a fold-up bike, a tandem bike (my folks even have a triplet bike), and an old Raleigh Racer. Immaterial, I know, but only mentioned to show I enjoy cycling as much as I use the car.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]That's also true. I was exiting a side street in Shirley. I was approaching the junction with the high street (so fortunately going slow) when a pedestrian stepped out and nearly hit my bonnet. I hit my brakes and stopped dead (as was so close to the junction I was only doing about 5mph). The pedestrian jumped and then shouted at me. Whatever happened to the Green Cross Code being taught in schools. (It wouldn't have excused this guy though as he was in his 40s). When I was in school in the 80s we had cycling profiiciency with highway code, green cross code, and that whole 'be seen' campaign about wearing high-vis gear and using proper lights on your bike. I cycle and drive. I have a fold-up bike, a tandem bike (my folks even have a triplet bike), and an old Raleigh Racer. Immaterial, I know, but only mentioned to show I enjoy cycling as much as I use the car. RomseyKeith
  • Score: 5

4:03pm Wed 26 Feb 14

elvisimo says...

RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
That's also true. I was exiting a side street in Shirley. I was approaching the junction with the high street (so fortunately going slow) when a pedestrian stepped out and nearly hit my bonnet. I hit my brakes and stopped dead (as was so close to the junction I was only doing about 5mph). The pedestrian jumped and then shouted at me.
Whatever happened to the Green Cross Code being taught in schools. (It wouldn't have excused this guy though as he was in his 40s).
When I was in school in the 80s we had cycling profiiciency with highway code, green cross code, and that whole 'be seen' campaign about wearing high-vis gear and using proper lights on your bike.
I cycle and drive. I have a fold-up bike, a tandem bike (my folks even have a triplet bike), and an old Raleigh Racer. Immaterial, I know, but only mentioned to show I enjoy cycling as much as I use the car.
Pedestrians are getting worse. it seems more and more frequent that they just step out without looking or step out whilst reading something on their phone or making a call. It is strange as my generation were always taught the stop look listen rule which 25 years later you automatically do.
[quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]That's also true. I was exiting a side street in Shirley. I was approaching the junction with the high street (so fortunately going slow) when a pedestrian stepped out and nearly hit my bonnet. I hit my brakes and stopped dead (as was so close to the junction I was only doing about 5mph). The pedestrian jumped and then shouted at me. Whatever happened to the Green Cross Code being taught in schools. (It wouldn't have excused this guy though as he was in his 40s). When I was in school in the 80s we had cycling profiiciency with highway code, green cross code, and that whole 'be seen' campaign about wearing high-vis gear and using proper lights on your bike. I cycle and drive. I have a fold-up bike, a tandem bike (my folks even have a triplet bike), and an old Raleigh Racer. Immaterial, I know, but only mentioned to show I enjoy cycling as much as I use the car.[/p][/quote]Pedestrians are getting worse. it seems more and more frequent that they just step out without looking or step out whilst reading something on their phone or making a call. It is strange as my generation were always taught the stop look listen rule which 25 years later you automatically do. elvisimo
  • Score: 6

4:05pm Wed 26 Feb 14

RomseyKeith says...

Mary80 wrote:
Brite Spark wrote: I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).
So damaging her car is somehow justified? Sorry but if it was my car i'd send you the bill ASAP
So you'd drive that poorly, without checking mirrors, just to save having to wait for a few extra seconds?
(I don't think you would. and he only hit her because of that fact; it was not a retaliation, but an accident because of driving without due care and attention).
[quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brite Spark[/bold] wrote: I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).[/p][/quote]So damaging her car is somehow justified? Sorry but if it was my car i'd send you the bill ASAP[/p][/quote]So you'd drive that poorly, without checking mirrors, just to save having to wait for a few extra seconds? (I don't think you would. and he only hit her because of that fact; it was not a retaliation, but an accident because of driving without due care and attention). RomseyKeith
  • Score: 7

4:10pm Wed 26 Feb 14

sotonbusdriver says...

Inform Al wrote:
CivicCentered wrote:
sotonbusdriver wrote:
When both car drivers and cyclists alike, are always competing to be ahead of each other at roundabouts and junctions, it really doesn't make any difference what you do, they will always clash.. Driving off after knocking someone off is diabolical, and I seriously hope someone got the car details. To improve the situation, cyclists, need to be seen to ride, properly, not, weaving, on and off the pavement to suit themselves, not ride through red lights, and generally abide by the highway code... And on the same note, car drivers need to be more aware and where possible let the cyclist go, then when the space is there to safely pass, do so, with a good measure of space... Cyclist often nip down the inside of a queue of cars, and ignore them indicating that they are turning left, then when they disappear in the car blindspot, the car turns and hits them, cyclist do need to read the cars, indicators and position of vehicles, and hang back to cycle on behind the car, and then preserve their own life...
Well said that man...

It appears to me that there is a bit of a cyclist v motorist battle at the moment and it can generally be fixed wtih a little education. I hear an awful lot of "they think they own the road" directed at both parties, but if people were just a bit more aware of their surroundings and other road users we could happily coexist on the roads.

No matter what either side says, there is fault on both sides, but both need to realise that they're putting their lives (or someone elses) at risk by not being safe.

I say this as a cyclist (if anyone cares)
It's not all cyclists or drivers that are constantly throwing their toys out of the pram, it's just two or three in both camps on this site doing that. Most drivers and most cyclists respect each other.
I didn't make the point that all motorist or cyclists are alike and totally ignorant, but I wouldn't mind betting those that are involved in accidents are those that for one reason or another at in a hurry and can't be bothered to abide by the highway code.

I have been a cyclist and used appropriate cycle paths and looked/stopped before joining the road again, also a motorcyclist of some 30+ decades of riding, and obviously car and commercial driver...

I have never had any accidents on cycle, motorcycle or car, ,, But with the bus work, people just don't want you on the road, and accidents are hard to avoid when they deliberately try to force you off the road or make sure there isn't enough space to get through on purpose, but if they moved over the 3 foot to their nearside which they have it wouldn't have been an accident.

People in general are in too much hurry and don't seem to care about the Highway code... Again I am not saying all, but too many out there that just don't care.... Police new powers of lane hogging, tailgating, etc, doesn't seems to have started here in Southampton, the Police just ignore it
[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]CivicCentered[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sotonbusdriver[/bold] wrote: When both car drivers and cyclists alike, are always competing to be ahead of each other at roundabouts and junctions, it really doesn't make any difference what you do, they will always clash.. Driving off after knocking someone off is diabolical, and I seriously hope someone got the car details. To improve the situation, cyclists, need to be seen to ride, properly, not, weaving, on and off the pavement to suit themselves, not ride through red lights, and generally abide by the highway code... And on the same note, car drivers need to be more aware and where possible let the cyclist go, then when the space is there to safely pass, do so, with a good measure of space... Cyclist often nip down the inside of a queue of cars, and ignore them indicating that they are turning left, then when they disappear in the car blindspot, the car turns and hits them, cyclist do need to read the cars, indicators and position of vehicles, and hang back to cycle on behind the car, and then preserve their own life...[/p][/quote]Well said that man... It appears to me that there is a bit of a cyclist v motorist battle at the moment and it can generally be fixed wtih a little education. I hear an awful lot of "they think they own the road" directed at both parties, but if people were just a bit more aware of their surroundings and other road users we could happily coexist on the roads. No matter what either side says, there is fault on both sides, but both need to realise that they're putting their lives (or someone elses) at risk by not being safe. I say this as a cyclist (if anyone cares)[/p][/quote]It's not all cyclists or drivers that are constantly throwing their toys out of the pram, it's just two or three in both camps on this site doing that. Most drivers and most cyclists respect each other.[/p][/quote]I didn't make the point that all motorist or cyclists are alike and totally ignorant, but I wouldn't mind betting those that are involved in accidents are those that for one reason or another at in a hurry and can't be bothered to abide by the highway code. I have been a cyclist and used appropriate cycle paths and looked/stopped before joining the road again, also a motorcyclist of some 30+ decades of riding, and obviously car and commercial driver... I have never had any accidents on cycle, motorcycle or car, ,, But with the bus work, people just don't want you on the road, and accidents are hard to avoid when they deliberately try to force you off the road or make sure there isn't enough space to get through on purpose, but if they moved over the 3 foot to their nearside which they have it wouldn't have been an accident. People in general are in too much hurry and don't seem to care about the Highway code... Again I am not saying all, but too many out there that just don't care.... Police new powers of lane hogging, tailgating, etc, doesn't seems to have started here in Southampton, the Police just ignore it sotonbusdriver
  • Score: 7

4:32pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Torchie1 says...

miltonarcher wrote:
The solution to all of this conflict is so simple I'm really surprised nobody has thought of it. Either, get everyone into cars, or, everyone onto bikes. Put Bike and Ride car parks outside the city limits if the vote is for the bikes. Or, Bike parks and simply hire electric cars from the Council to get into town centre. So which is better, bikes or cars? There's only one way to find out. FIGHT !!!
Official statistics show that a mere 2% of journeys are made by bicycle so you're riding for a fall if you'll pardon the pun.
[quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: The solution to all of this conflict is so simple I'm really surprised nobody has thought of it. Either, get everyone into cars, or, everyone onto bikes. Put Bike and Ride car parks outside the city limits if the vote is for the bikes. Or, Bike parks and simply hire electric cars from the Council to get into town centre. So which is better, bikes or cars? There's only one way to find out. FIGHT !!![/p][/quote]Official statistics show that a mere 2% of journeys are made by bicycle so you're riding for a fall if you'll pardon the pun. Torchie1
  • Score: -2

4:38pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Torchie1 says...

RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
That's also true. I was exiting a side street in Shirley. I was approaching the junction with the high street (so fortunately going slow) when a pedestrian stepped out and nearly hit my bonnet. I hit my brakes and stopped dead (as was so close to the junction I was only doing about 5mph). The pedestrian jumped and then shouted at me.
Whatever happened to the Green Cross Code being taught in schools. (It wouldn't have excused this guy though as he was in his 40s).
When I was in school in the 80s we had cycling profiiciency with highway code, green cross code, and that whole 'be seen' campaign about wearing high-vis gear and using proper lights on your bike.
I cycle and drive. I have a fold-up bike, a tandem bike (my folks even have a triplet bike), and an old Raleigh Racer. Immaterial, I know, but only mentioned to show I enjoy cycling as much as I use the car.
It's quite amusing reading the posts made by cyclists who believe that pedestrians should be taught the Green Cross Code while staunchly refusing any training, testing or even a knowledge of the Highway Code for their own group.
[quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]That's also true. I was exiting a side street in Shirley. I was approaching the junction with the high street (so fortunately going slow) when a pedestrian stepped out and nearly hit my bonnet. I hit my brakes and stopped dead (as was so close to the junction I was only doing about 5mph). The pedestrian jumped and then shouted at me. Whatever happened to the Green Cross Code being taught in schools. (It wouldn't have excused this guy though as he was in his 40s). When I was in school in the 80s we had cycling profiiciency with highway code, green cross code, and that whole 'be seen' campaign about wearing high-vis gear and using proper lights on your bike. I cycle and drive. I have a fold-up bike, a tandem bike (my folks even have a triplet bike), and an old Raleigh Racer. Immaterial, I know, but only mentioned to show I enjoy cycling as much as I use the car.[/p][/quote]It's quite amusing reading the posts made by cyclists who believe that pedestrians should be taught the Green Cross Code while staunchly refusing any training, testing or even a knowledge of the Highway Code for their own group. Torchie1
  • Score: 5

6:29pm Wed 26 Feb 14

seaking says...

All these cyclists feeling hard done to when they or one of thier ilk get a knock make me laugh. With all of the money and time wasted on this so called improvment there are still dozens of them riding on the Bridge pavement like it is thier right of way . Some are very brave with thier abuse to female pedestrians who have the ignorance to hold them up but are very cowardly to a threat of being thrown under the next bus. How can the expect sympathy trom drivers and pedestians when so many cyclists show contempt for them?
All these cyclists feeling hard done to when they or one of thier ilk get a knock make me laugh. With all of the money and time wasted on this so called improvment there are still dozens of them riding on the Bridge pavement like it is thier right of way . Some are very brave with thier abuse to female pedestrians who have the ignorance to hold them up but are very cowardly to a threat of being thrown under the next bus. How can the expect sympathy trom drivers and pedestians when so many cyclists show contempt for them? seaking
  • Score: -1

6:34pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

seaking wrote:
All these cyclists feeling hard done to when they or one of thier ilk get a knock make me laugh. With all of the money and time wasted on this so called improvment there are still dozens of them riding on the Bridge pavement like it is thier right of way . Some are very brave with thier abuse to female pedestrians who have the ignorance to hold them up but are very cowardly to a threat of being thrown under the next bus. How can the expect sympathy trom drivers and pedestians when so many cyclists show contempt for them?
What do you expect a MINORITY of cyclists to do when motorists get dangerously close to them or things like this happen?
[quote][p][bold]seaking[/bold] wrote: All these cyclists feeling hard done to when they or one of thier ilk get a knock make me laugh. With all of the money and time wasted on this so called improvment there are still dozens of them riding on the Bridge pavement like it is thier right of way . Some are very brave with thier abuse to female pedestrians who have the ignorance to hold them up but are very cowardly to a threat of being thrown under the next bus. How can the expect sympathy trom drivers and pedestians when so many cyclists show contempt for them?[/p][/quote]What do you expect a MINORITY of cyclists to do when motorists get dangerously close to them or things like this happen? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

7:36pm Wed 26 Feb 14

maswep says...

This junction neither works for the motorists or cyclists. in order to turn right onto the bridge from canute road a cyclist has to cross the lane of traffic to their right that wants to go on. The approach from Woolston Russian roulette as was proven this morning at least the previous filter lane offered you an idea of the drivers intentions. Someone at the council should be bought to task over this abomination.

And for the record yes I'm one of those daily cyclists I chose to so as to not be a burden to the nhs through inactivity and to ensure I don't die of a heart attack before my kids grow up. Mutual respect on the road and proper planning will ensure I don't get killed like my colleague David.
This junction neither works for the motorists or cyclists. in order to turn right onto the bridge from canute road a cyclist has to cross the lane of traffic to their right that wants to go on. The approach from Woolston Russian roulette as was proven this morning at least the previous filter lane offered you an idea of the drivers intentions. Someone at the council should be bought to task over this abomination. And for the record yes I'm one of those daily cyclists I chose to so as to not be a burden to the nhs through inactivity and to ensure I don't die of a heart attack before my kids grow up. Mutual respect on the road and proper planning will ensure I don't get killed like my colleague David. maswep
  • Score: 4

7:38pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Forest Resident says...

bigfella777 wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
Exactly right, pedestrians assume they can step into the road and then see if there is a car coming or cross by ear, very dangerous.
It's funny that people assume that if a cyclist hits a pedestrian it's the pedestrian that comes off worse, well not in the accidents of this type that I've seen it's not, because the cyclist tries to avoid them and then loses control/balance and ends up on the deck.
Indeed, all too often I experience incidents like this when cycling in Southampton http://youtu.be/-lOi
CqLW8WY, no group of road users are perfect, but dangerous road infrastructure and inconsiderate/incomp
etent motorists don't exactly help the situation.
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]Exactly right, pedestrians assume they can step into the road and then see if there is a car coming or cross by ear, very dangerous. It's funny that people assume that if a cyclist hits a pedestrian it's the pedestrian that comes off worse, well not in the accidents of this type that I've seen it's not, because the cyclist tries to avoid them and then loses control/balance and ends up on the deck.[/p][/quote]Indeed, all too often I experience incidents like this when cycling in Southampton http://youtu.be/-lOi CqLW8WY, no group of road users are perfect, but dangerous road infrastructure and inconsiderate/incomp etent motorists don't exactly help the situation. Forest Resident
  • Score: 3

8:01pm Wed 26 Feb 14

seven777. says...

I used the junction for the first time today, really Southampton City Council !!! I ride a motorcycle but today I was in a van and felt you wasted my money here, you lined someone’s pockets but its not safer for any road user and to add to that im fu@ked if you’d catch me riding a bicycle across it.
I used the junction for the first time today, really Southampton City Council !!! I ride a motorcycle but today I was in a van and felt you wasted my money here, you lined someone’s pockets but its not safer for any road user and to add to that im fu@ked if you’d catch me riding a bicycle across it. seven777.
  • Score: 6

8:06pm Wed 26 Feb 14

southamptonadi says...

elvisimo wrote:
where is the Geoff59 guy - he normally comes out with some right pearlers?
I suspect he's taken the driver out for a celebratory drink. Only joking Geoff.

Oh I'm shocked he's not on here too,
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: where is the Geoff59 guy - he normally comes out with some right pearlers?[/p][/quote]I suspect he's taken the driver out for a celebratory drink. Only joking Geoff. Oh I'm shocked he's not on here too, southamptonadi
  • Score: 2

8:09pm Wed 26 Feb 14

southamptonadi says...

Inform Al wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.
Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?
[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.[/p][/quote]Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane? southamptonadi
  • Score: 3

8:28pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Nattajack says...

I use this junction 4 times a day, turning right onto Albert Road North, then coming back and turning right onto Central Bridge. Then again turning Right onto ABN and finally left onto the Itchen Bridge. From the first morning this junction was opened I have stated that it is an accident waiting to happen. It is extremely dangerous for both cyclist and motorist, I'm the latter, only occasionally using a bike when the mood takes me and I would never contemplate this junction on my bike. A week ago I sent an email to SCC stating my concerns (funnily enough they haven't replied) I have never come across a set of traffic lights at a crossroad where opposing signals allow traffic to travel in all three directions at the exact same time!! I really don't see the point in finger pointing over who is the better road user or who has more rights. There are good and bad in both, some cyclists do things that are inconsiderate and dangerous, as do some motorists. Just be observant,considerat
e, courteous and safe and everyone will have a better day. I sincerely hope nobody is seriously hurt before anything is done about it.
I use this junction 4 times a day, turning right onto Albert Road North, then coming back and turning right onto Central Bridge. Then again turning Right onto ABN and finally left onto the Itchen Bridge. From the first morning this junction was opened I have stated that it is an accident waiting to happen. It is extremely dangerous for both cyclist and motorist, I'm the latter, only occasionally using a bike when the mood takes me and I would never contemplate this junction on my bike. A week ago I sent an email to SCC stating my concerns (funnily enough they haven't replied) I have never come across a set of traffic lights at a crossroad where opposing signals allow traffic to travel in all three directions at the exact same time!! I really don't see the point in finger pointing over who is the better road user or who has more rights. There are good and bad in both, some cyclists do things that are inconsiderate and dangerous, as do some motorists. Just be observant,considerat e, courteous and safe and everyone will have a better day. I sincerely hope nobody is seriously hurt before anything is done about it. Nattajack
  • Score: 4

8:38pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Mary80 says...

Is anyone surprised the whole thing is a failure?
Is anyone surprised the whole thing is a failure? Mary80
  • Score: 1

8:42pm Wed 26 Feb 14

geoff51 says...

elvisimo wrote:
where is the Geoff59 guy - he normally comes out with some right pearlers?
Are you missing me?
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: where is the Geoff59 guy - he normally comes out with some right pearlers?[/p][/quote]Are you missing me? geoff51
  • Score: -4

8:51pm Wed 26 Feb 14

geoff51 says...

I decided not to join in with the self congratulating cyclists on this thread, who after 1.7 million was spent on them, still whinge about it.
Use the bloody thing you ungrateful gits! Put up or shut up!
I decided not to join in with the self congratulating cyclists on this thread, who after 1.7 million was spent on them, still whinge about it. Use the bloody thing you ungrateful gits! Put up or shut up! geoff51
  • Score: -6

8:57pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Mary80 wrote:
Is anyone surprised the whole thing is a failure?
Not in the slightest, in fact I predcted there would be an incident there in the first month and I was so confident of my prediction i could have put money on it and I would have won the bet but that's betting with peoples lives, not something I'm in to.
[quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: Is anyone surprised the whole thing is a failure?[/p][/quote]Not in the slightest, in fact I predcted there would be an incident there in the first month and I was so confident of my prediction i could have put money on it and I would have won the bet but that's betting with peoples lives, not something I'm in to. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 6

8:58pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

geoff51 wrote:
I decided not to join in with the self congratulating cyclists on this thread, who after 1.7 million was spent on them, still whinge about it.
Use the bloody thing you ungrateful gits! Put up or shut up!
Are you blind AND stupid? The junction hasn't been fully operational for a month yet some has already hit a cyclist and ran off.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: I decided not to join in with the self congratulating cyclists on this thread, who after 1.7 million was spent on them, still whinge about it. Use the bloody thing you ungrateful gits! Put up or shut up![/p][/quote]Are you blind AND stupid? The junction hasn't been fully operational for a month yet some has already hit a cyclist and ran off. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 5

8:59pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Positively4thStreet says...

RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic
iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the
y would have far more right to pontificate)
[quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate) Positively4thStreet
  • Score: 1

9:00pm Wed 26 Feb 14

elvisimo says...

geoff51 wrote:
I decided not to join in with the self congratulating cyclists on this thread, who after 1.7 million was spent on them, still whinge about it.
Use the bloody thing you ungrateful gits! Put up or shut up!
There she is at last.
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: I decided not to join in with the self congratulating cyclists on this thread, who after 1.7 million was spent on them, still whinge about it. Use the bloody thing you ungrateful gits! Put up or shut up![/p][/quote]There she is at last. elvisimo
  • Score: 5

9:06pm Wed 26 Feb 14

KSO16R says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic

iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the

y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ? KSO16R
  • Score: 0

9:08pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic

iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the

y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax? I have third party, damage and theft insurance, I have a driving licence and my bike is ALWAYS in a road worthy condition, only time it wasn't in a road worthy condition, was when I last took it to the bike shop when the spokes decided to give up and my front shifter cable snapped, also, EVERYONE has a right to "pontificate" about the PUBLIC roads that NOBODY owns, also, ALL cyclists contribute, normally through council tax which is what pays for the bulk of road maintenance.
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax? I have third party, damage and theft insurance, I have a driving licence and my bike is ALWAYS in a road worthy condition, only time it wasn't in a road worthy condition, was when I last took it to the bike shop when the spokes decided to give up and my front shifter cable snapped, also, EVERYONE has a right to "pontificate" about the PUBLIC roads that NOBODY owns, also, ALL cyclists contribute, normally through council tax which is what pays for the bulk of road maintenance. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 2

9:15pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Positively4thStreet says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic


iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the


y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax? I have third party, damage and theft insurance, I have a driving licence and my bike is ALWAYS in a road worthy condition, only time it wasn't in a road worthy condition, was when I last took it to the bike shop when the spokes decided to give up and my front shifter cable snapped, also, EVERYONE has a right to "pontificate" about the PUBLIC roads that NOBODY owns, also, ALL cyclists contribute, normally through council tax which is what pays for the bulk of road maintenance.
You know very well what I mean.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax? I have third party, damage and theft insurance, I have a driving licence and my bike is ALWAYS in a road worthy condition, only time it wasn't in a road worthy condition, was when I last took it to the bike shop when the spokes decided to give up and my front shifter cable snapped, also, EVERYONE has a right to "pontificate" about the PUBLIC roads that NOBODY owns, also, ALL cyclists contribute, normally through council tax which is what pays for the bulk of road maintenance.[/p][/quote]You know very well what I mean. Positively4thStreet
  • Score: -2

9:27pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Positively4thStreet says...

KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic


iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the


y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
[quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED. Positively4thStreet
  • Score: 0

9:31pm Wed 26 Feb 14

KSO16R says...

Torchie1 wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
The solution to all of this conflict is so simple I'm really surprised nobody has thought of it. Either, get everyone into cars, or, everyone onto bikes. Put Bike and Ride car parks outside the city limits if the vote is for the bikes. Or, Bike parks and simply hire electric cars from the Council to get into town centre. So which is better, bikes or cars? There's only one way to find out. FIGHT !!!
Official statistics show that a mere 2% of journeys are made by bicycle so you're riding for a fall if you'll pardon the pun.
Not quite right there are you torchie1
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: The solution to all of this conflict is so simple I'm really surprised nobody has thought of it. Either, get everyone into cars, or, everyone onto bikes. Put Bike and Ride car parks outside the city limits if the vote is for the bikes. Or, Bike parks and simply hire electric cars from the Council to get into town centre. So which is better, bikes or cars? There's only one way to find out. FIGHT !!![/p][/quote]Official statistics show that a mere 2% of journeys are made by bicycle so you're riding for a fall if you'll pardon the pun.[/p][/quote]Not quite right there are you torchie1 KSO16R
  • Score: 1

9:35pm Wed 26 Feb 14

KSO16R says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic



iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the



y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question. KSO16R
  • Score: -2

9:41pm Wed 26 Feb 14

wizard says...

KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic




iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the




y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
[quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax? wizard
  • Score: 0

9:53pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Positively4thStreet says...

wizard wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic





iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the





y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
Which one do they pay now then?
[quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?[/p][/quote]Which one do they pay now then? Positively4thStreet
  • Score: -4

9:55pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Mary80 says...

No offence to cyclists but that 1.7 million could have been funneled back into essential services that are desperately in need of money like Social Services
No offence to cyclists but that 1.7 million could have been funneled back into essential services that are desperately in need of money like Social Services Mary80
  • Score: 5

9:59pm Wed 26 Feb 14

wizard says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic






iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the






y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
Which one do they pay now then?
council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?[/p][/quote]Which one do they pay now then?[/p][/quote]council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots wizard
  • Score: -3

10:05pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Positively4thStreet says...

wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic







iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the







y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
Which one do they pay now then?
council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots
Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax.
Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it!
[quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?[/p][/quote]Which one do they pay now then?[/p][/quote]council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots[/p][/quote]Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax. Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it! Positively4thStreet
  • Score: -5

10:09pm Wed 26 Feb 14

wizard says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic








iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the








y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
Which one do they pay now then?
council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots
Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax.
Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it!
What nonsense, Ive already paid, via all my taxes, I choose to ride instead.If you don't cycle that's your choice, think that is called freedom of choice! Not sure why you are trying to berate my freedom of choice?
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?[/p][/quote]Which one do they pay now then?[/p][/quote]council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots[/p][/quote]Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax. Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it![/p][/quote]What nonsense, Ive already paid, via all my taxes, I choose to ride instead.If you don't cycle that's your choice, think that is called freedom of choice! Not sure why you are trying to berate my freedom of choice? wizard
  • Score: 3

10:17pm Wed 26 Feb 14

charrlee says...

I haven't seen so many cyclists about since the heavy rains and floods began before Christmas. Do you think some of them may have dissolved?

And speaking of other "missing persons" (Elvissimo earlier), where are Ginger_psyclist's two comrades : Downfader and Graham Simmons? They usually turn up to gigs like this one with their special brand of authoritative (sounding) pronouncements.
I haven't seen so many cyclists about since the heavy rains and floods began before Christmas. Do you think some of them may have dissolved? And speaking of other "missing persons" (Elvissimo earlier), where are Ginger_psyclist's two comrades : Downfader and Graham Simmons? They usually turn up to gigs like this one with their special brand of authoritative (sounding) pronouncements. charrlee
  • Score: 1

10:17pm Wed 26 Feb 14

KSO16R says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic








iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the








y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
Which one do they pay now then?
council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots
Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax.
Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it!
You pay VAT when you buy a bicycle. I also have a car but often choose to cycle depending on the journey. Thereby, not using my car as much i am subsidising you.
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?[/p][/quote]Which one do they pay now then?[/p][/quote]council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots[/p][/quote]Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax. Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it![/p][/quote]You pay VAT when you buy a bicycle. I also have a car but often choose to cycle depending on the journey. Thereby, not using my car as much i am subsidising you. KSO16R
  • Score: 3

10:21pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Positively4thStreet says...

wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic









iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the









y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
Which one do they pay now then?
council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots
Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax.
Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it!
What nonsense, Ive already paid, via all my taxes, I choose to ride instead.If you don't cycle that's your choice, think that is called freedom of choice! Not sure why you are trying to berate my freedom of choice?
You can ride wherever you please,most cyclists do nowadays,all I'm saying is that the deluded idea that you are are in someway paying for it,is like you say..nonsense!
[quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?[/p][/quote]Which one do they pay now then?[/p][/quote]council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots[/p][/quote]Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax. Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it![/p][/quote]What nonsense, Ive already paid, via all my taxes, I choose to ride instead.If you don't cycle that's your choice, think that is called freedom of choice! Not sure why you are trying to berate my freedom of choice?[/p][/quote]You can ride wherever you please,most cyclists do nowadays,all I'm saying is that the deluded idea that you are are in someway paying for it,is like you say..nonsense! Positively4thStreet
  • Score: -6

10:26pm Wed 26 Feb 14

charrlee says...

Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person.
No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic!
Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person. No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic! charrlee
  • Score: -1

10:31pm Wed 26 Feb 14

charrlee says...

Sorry everyone! Losing my concentration there.......have I missed anything important?
Sorry everyone! Losing my concentration there.......have I missed anything important? charrlee
  • Score: -1

10:32pm Wed 26 Feb 14

hmw says...

charrlee wrote:
Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person.
No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic!
Unlike geoff51, who in real life harbours a secret fetish for cyclists and likes to dress his hand in lycra and fist himself
[quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person. No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic![/p][/quote]Unlike geoff51, who in real life harbours a secret fetish for cyclists and likes to dress his hand in lycra and fist himself hmw
  • Score: 0

10:45pm Wed 26 Feb 14

wizard says...

Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic










iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the










y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
Which one do they pay now then?
council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots
Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax.
Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it!
What nonsense, Ive already paid, via all my taxes, I choose to ride instead.If you don't cycle that's your choice, think that is called freedom of choice! Not sure why you are trying to berate my freedom of choice?
You can ride wherever you please,most cyclists do nowadays,all I'm saying is that the deluded idea that you are are in someway paying for it,is like you say..nonsense!
Oh my you have managed to brainwash yourself! i have pity for you! im certainly not deluded like you are you poor fool! im hoping you have a fulfilled life like mine!
[quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?[/p][/quote]Which one do they pay now then?[/p][/quote]council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots[/p][/quote]Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax. Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it![/p][/quote]What nonsense, Ive already paid, via all my taxes, I choose to ride instead.If you don't cycle that's your choice, think that is called freedom of choice! Not sure why you are trying to berate my freedom of choice?[/p][/quote]You can ride wherever you please,most cyclists do nowadays,all I'm saying is that the deluded idea that you are are in someway paying for it,is like you say..nonsense![/p][/quote]Oh my you have managed to brainwash yourself! i have pity for you! im certainly not deluded like you are you poor fool! im hoping you have a fulfilled life like mine! wizard
  • Score: 0

10:50pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Nattajack says...

KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic









iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the









y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
Which one do they pay now then?
council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots
Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax.
Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it!
You pay VAT when you buy a bicycle. I also have a car but often choose to cycle depending on the journey. Thereby, not using my car as much i am subsidising you.
My god, I hope I never come across any of you on the road (cyclist, motorist, whatever) you all sound so obnoxious, always having to be right and have the last word. Just get over yourselves and try sticking to the point for a change.
[quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?[/p][/quote]Which one do they pay now then?[/p][/quote]council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots[/p][/quote]Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax. Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it![/p][/quote]You pay VAT when you buy a bicycle. I also have a car but often choose to cycle depending on the journey. Thereby, not using my car as much i am subsidising you.[/p][/quote]My god, I hope I never come across any of you on the road (cyclist, motorist, whatever) you all sound so obnoxious, always having to be right and have the last word. Just get over yourselves and try sticking to the point for a change. Nattajack
  • Score: -2

11:02pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Positively4thStreet says...

wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic











iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the











y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
Which one do they pay now then?
council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots
Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax.
Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it!
What nonsense, Ive already paid, via all my taxes, I choose to ride instead.If you don't cycle that's your choice, think that is called freedom of choice! Not sure why you are trying to berate my freedom of choice?
You can ride wherever you please,most cyclists do nowadays,all I'm saying is that the deluded idea that you are are in someway paying for it,is like you say..nonsense!
Oh my you have managed to brainwash yourself! i have pity for you! im certainly not deluded like you are you poor fool! im hoping you have a fulfilled life like mine!
Well,I will try to,as long as I don't get knocked over when I walk out of my front gate,by a cyclist riding illegally down the pavement.
[quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?[/p][/quote]Which one do they pay now then?[/p][/quote]council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots[/p][/quote]Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax. Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it![/p][/quote]What nonsense, Ive already paid, via all my taxes, I choose to ride instead.If you don't cycle that's your choice, think that is called freedom of choice! Not sure why you are trying to berate my freedom of choice?[/p][/quote]You can ride wherever you please,most cyclists do nowadays,all I'm saying is that the deluded idea that you are are in someway paying for it,is like you say..nonsense![/p][/quote]Oh my you have managed to brainwash yourself! i have pity for you! im certainly not deluded like you are you poor fool! im hoping you have a fulfilled life like mine![/p][/quote]Well,I will try to,as long as I don't get knocked over when I walk out of my front gate,by a cyclist riding illegally down the pavement. Positively4thStreet
  • Score: -1

11:32pm Wed 26 Feb 14

Torchie1 says...

KSO16R wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
miltonarcher wrote:
The solution to all of this conflict is so simple I'm really surprised nobody has thought of it. Either, get everyone into cars, or, everyone onto bikes. Put Bike and Ride car parks outside the city limits if the vote is for the bikes. Or, Bike parks and simply hire electric cars from the Council to get into town centre. So which is better, bikes or cars? There's only one way to find out. FIGHT !!!
Official statistics show that a mere 2% of journeys are made by bicycle so you're riding for a fall if you'll pardon the pun.
Not quite right there are you torchie1
Only quoting the information presented by the government and drawn from the 2011 Census. Sorry if it's not convenient for your 2%.
[quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]miltonarcher[/bold] wrote: The solution to all of this conflict is so simple I'm really surprised nobody has thought of it. Either, get everyone into cars, or, everyone onto bikes. Put Bike and Ride car parks outside the city limits if the vote is for the bikes. Or, Bike parks and simply hire electric cars from the Council to get into town centre. So which is better, bikes or cars? There's only one way to find out. FIGHT !!![/p][/quote]Official statistics show that a mere 2% of journeys are made by bicycle so you're riding for a fall if you'll pardon the pun.[/p][/quote]Not quite right there are you torchie1[/p][/quote]Only quoting the information presented by the government and drawn from the 2011 Census. Sorry if it's not convenient for your 2%. Torchie1
  • Score: -1

11:33pm Wed 26 Feb 14

KSO16R says...

Nattajack wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
wizard wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
KSO16R wrote:
Positively4thStreet wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic










iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the










y would have far more right to pontificate)
What tax are you referring to ?
A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.
I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.
So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?
Which one do they pay now then?
council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots
Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax.
Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it!
You pay VAT when you buy a bicycle. I also have a car but often choose to cycle depending on the journey. Thereby, not using my car as much i am subsidising you.
My god, I hope I never come across any of you on the road (cyclist, motorist, whatever) you all sound so obnoxious, always having to be right and have the last word. Just get over yourselves and try sticking to the point for a change.
As long as you stay in the sandy heathland you should be fine : )
[quote][p][bold]Nattajack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]wizard[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]KSO16R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Positively4thStreet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]Best post of the day Keith! (Although I still maintain that if cyclists had to contribute and satisfy all the conditions that motorists have to eg. Tax,insurance,profic iency testing,mot certificates,etc,the y would have far more right to pontificate)[/p][/quote]What tax are you referring to ?[/p][/quote]A tax which would contribute to the upkeep of roads( and pavements which cyclists seem to use a lot nowadays),and not,as you are obviously trying to imply,VED.[/p][/quote]I think you were the one alluding to VED : ) l was merely asking a question.[/p][/quote]So you want cyclists to pay an extra tax?[/p][/quote]Which one do they pay now then?[/p][/quote]council tax, income tax, VED! oh hang on! general taxation pays for roads, not the stupid outdated belief that motorists pay for roads! Google it if u must? you will find im right, BTW im a car owner and I work, but I like to cycle lots[/p][/quote]Well I pay all those,and I don't cycle,so presumably that means I'm subsidising you then?VED isn't road tax. Its a free,unregulated ride...admit it![/p][/quote]You pay VAT when you buy a bicycle. I also have a car but often choose to cycle depending on the journey. Thereby, not using my car as much i am subsidising you.[/p][/quote]My god, I hope I never come across any of you on the road (cyclist, motorist, whatever) you all sound so obnoxious, always having to be right and have the last word. Just get over yourselves and try sticking to the point for a change.[/p][/quote]As long as you stay in the sandy heathland you should be fine : ) KSO16R
  • Score: 0

12:14am Thu 27 Feb 14

charrlee says...

hmw wrote:
charrlee wrote:
Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person.
No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic!
Unlike geoff51, who in real life harbours a secret fetish for cyclists and likes to dress his hand in lycra and fist himself
How can you say such absurd things about a name on an open forum?
[quote][p][bold]hmw[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person. No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic![/p][/quote]Unlike geoff51, who in real life harbours a secret fetish for cyclists and likes to dress his hand in lycra and fist himself[/p][/quote]How can you say such absurd things about a name on an open forum? charrlee
  • Score: 1

12:53am Thu 27 Feb 14

Dan Soton says...

It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit.


As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones.

Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks.


-

April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton


http://www.dailyecho
.co.uk/news/10350582
.Cycle_junction_for_
major_road__potty__s
ay_motoring_groups




,,
It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit. As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones. Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks. - April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton http://www.dailyecho .co.uk/news/10350582 .Cycle_junction_for_ major_road__potty__s ay_motoring_groups ,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 7

1:10am Thu 27 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Dan Soton wrote:
It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit.


As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones.

Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks.


-

April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton


http://www.dailyecho

.co.uk/news/10350582

.Cycle_junction_for_

major_road__potty__s

ay_motoring_groups




,,
Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit. As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones. Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks. - April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton http://www.dailyecho .co.uk/news/10350582 .Cycle_junction_for_ major_road__potty__s ay_motoring_groups ,,[/p][/quote]Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 2

1:37am Thu 27 Feb 14

Dan Soton says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit.


As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones.

Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks.


-

April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton


http://www.dailyecho


.co.uk/news/10350582


.Cycle_junction_for_


major_road__potty__s


ay_motoring_groups




,,
Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.
Car pollution kills more people than car accidents.. has Southampton a credible plan to stop the EU fines?


It looks like Southampton's car drivers have copped a £19 million air pollution fine..

Being realistic.. I don't think they're going to cough up their portion of the fine, so that leaves me and the rest of the UKs 30 million taxpayers with a £300 million bill.. and lets not forget the extra billions in health costs!!



UK FACES £300M FINE OVER FAILURE TO MEET AIR POLLUTION TARGETS BY 2010.

IAN JOHNSTON Thursday 20 February 2014.

poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents.

"It is an invisible killer and it prevents many people from living a fully active life. It already costs Europe €330bn-€940bn (£277bn-£789bn) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year," he said

CITY-DWELLERS ARE PARTICULARLY EXPOSED, AS MOST NITROGEN DIOXIDE ORIGINATES IN TRAFFIC FUMES … AIR POLLUTION LIMITS ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDED IN 16 ZONES ACROSS THE UK.

The affected areas are Greater London, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Teesside, the Potteries, Hull, SOUTHAMPTON, Glasgow, the east, the south-east, the east Midlands, Merseyside, Yorkshire & Humberside, the west Midlands, and the north-east.

But the commission said that Britain had not presented any "credible and workable plan" for meeting air quality standards by 2015

-
http://www.theguardi
an.com/environment/2
014/feb/20/air-pollu
tion-european-commis
sion-legal-action-uk
-nitrogen-dioxide


-

Ginger.. Bike/people friendly cars are coming problem is Southampton has run out of time....
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit. As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones. Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks. - April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton http://www.dailyecho .co.uk/news/10350582 .Cycle_junction_for_ major_road__potty__s ay_motoring_groups ,,[/p][/quote]Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.[/p][/quote]Car pollution kills more people than car accidents.. has Southampton a credible plan to stop the EU fines? It looks like Southampton's car drivers have copped a £19 million air pollution fine.. Being realistic.. I don't think they're going to cough up their portion of the fine, so that leaves me and the rest of the UKs 30 million taxpayers with a £300 million bill.. and lets not forget the extra billions in health costs!! UK FACES £300M FINE OVER FAILURE TO MEET AIR POLLUTION TARGETS BY 2010. IAN JOHNSTON Thursday 20 February 2014. poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents. "It is an invisible killer and it prevents many people from living a fully active life. It already costs Europe €330bn-€940bn (£277bn-£789bn) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year," he said CITY-DWELLERS ARE PARTICULARLY EXPOSED, AS MOST NITROGEN DIOXIDE ORIGINATES IN TRAFFIC FUMES … AIR POLLUTION LIMITS ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDED IN 16 ZONES ACROSS THE UK. The affected areas are Greater London, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Teesside, the Potteries, Hull, SOUTHAMPTON, Glasgow, the east, the south-east, the east Midlands, Merseyside, Yorkshire & Humberside, the west Midlands, and the north-east. But the commission said that Britain had not presented any "credible and workable plan" for meeting air quality standards by 2015 - http://www.theguardi an.com/environment/2 014/feb/20/air-pollu tion-european-commis sion-legal-action-uk -nitrogen-dioxide - Ginger.. Bike/people friendly cars are coming problem is Southampton has run out of time.... Dan Soton
  • Score: 4

2:26am Thu 27 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit.


As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones.

Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks.


-

April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton


http://www.dailyecho



.co.uk/news/10350582



.Cycle_junction_for_



major_road__potty__s



ay_motoring_groups




,,
Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.
Car pollution kills more people than car accidents.. has Southampton a credible plan to stop the EU fines?


It looks like Southampton's car drivers have copped a £19 million air pollution fine..

Being realistic.. I don't think they're going to cough up their portion of the fine, so that leaves me and the rest of the UKs 30 million taxpayers with a £300 million bill.. and lets not forget the extra billions in health costs!!



UK FACES £300M FINE OVER FAILURE TO MEET AIR POLLUTION TARGETS BY 2010.

IAN JOHNSTON Thursday 20 February 2014.

poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents.

"It is an invisible killer and it prevents many people from living a fully active life. It already costs Europe €330bn-€940bn (£277bn-£789bn) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year," he said

CITY-DWELLERS ARE PARTICULARLY EXPOSED, AS MOST NITROGEN DIOXIDE ORIGINATES IN TRAFFIC FUMES … AIR POLLUTION LIMITS ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDED IN 16 ZONES ACROSS THE UK.

The affected areas are Greater London, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Teesside, the Potteries, Hull, SOUTHAMPTON, Glasgow, the east, the south-east, the east Midlands, Merseyside, Yorkshire & Humberside, the west Midlands, and the north-east.

But the commission said that Britain had not presented any "credible and workable plan" for meeting air quality standards by 2015

-
http://www.theguardi

an.com/environment/2

014/feb/20/air-pollu

tion-european-commis

sion-legal-action-uk

-nitrogen-dioxide


-

Ginger.. Bike/people friendly cars are coming problem is Southampton has run out of time....
Well, all volvo's will soon be fitted with the upgraded collision prevention system that will avoid other vehicles, animals, pedestrians AND now cyclists by applying their brakes automatically, will hopefully prevent volvo drivers from tailgating us too.
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit. As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones. Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks. - April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton http://www.dailyecho .co.uk/news/10350582 .Cycle_junction_for_ major_road__potty__s ay_motoring_groups ,,[/p][/quote]Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.[/p][/quote]Car pollution kills more people than car accidents.. has Southampton a credible plan to stop the EU fines? It looks like Southampton's car drivers have copped a £19 million air pollution fine.. Being realistic.. I don't think they're going to cough up their portion of the fine, so that leaves me and the rest of the UKs 30 million taxpayers with a £300 million bill.. and lets not forget the extra billions in health costs!! UK FACES £300M FINE OVER FAILURE TO MEET AIR POLLUTION TARGETS BY 2010. IAN JOHNSTON Thursday 20 February 2014. poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents. "It is an invisible killer and it prevents many people from living a fully active life. It already costs Europe €330bn-€940bn (£277bn-£789bn) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year," he said CITY-DWELLERS ARE PARTICULARLY EXPOSED, AS MOST NITROGEN DIOXIDE ORIGINATES IN TRAFFIC FUMES … AIR POLLUTION LIMITS ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDED IN 16 ZONES ACROSS THE UK. The affected areas are Greater London, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Teesside, the Potteries, Hull, SOUTHAMPTON, Glasgow, the east, the south-east, the east Midlands, Merseyside, Yorkshire & Humberside, the west Midlands, and the north-east. But the commission said that Britain had not presented any "credible and workable plan" for meeting air quality standards by 2015 - http://www.theguardi an.com/environment/2 014/feb/20/air-pollu tion-european-commis sion-legal-action-uk -nitrogen-dioxide - Ginger.. Bike/people friendly cars are coming problem is Southampton has run out of time....[/p][/quote]Well, all volvo's will soon be fitted with the upgraded collision prevention system that will avoid other vehicles, animals, pedestrians AND now cyclists by applying their brakes automatically, will hopefully prevent volvo drivers from tailgating us too. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

2:32am Thu 27 Feb 14

Mary80 says...

charrlee wrote:
Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person.
No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic!
Uh sorry but a cycle friendly lane compared to the 93 million pound cuts we're gonna be forced to endure don't even come close to the same. Yes the 1.7 million SHOULD have gone to essential services that have been drastically slashed. So hospitals should close due to lack of funds just so cyclists can have a cycle lane? Someone clearly don't live in the real world and how was what i said harsh? Don't you read this very paper that says the council is axing pretty much every service? Or are you one of those not affected by every cut the goverment are enforcing?

And you don't know me don't act like you do k?
[quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person. No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic![/p][/quote]Uh sorry but a cycle friendly lane compared to the 93 million pound cuts we're gonna be forced to endure don't even come close to the same. Yes the 1.7 million SHOULD have gone to essential services that have been drastically slashed. So hospitals should close due to lack of funds just so cyclists can have a cycle lane? Someone clearly don't live in the real world and how was what i said harsh? Don't you read this very paper that says the council is axing pretty much every service? Or are you one of those not affected by every cut the goverment are enforcing? And you don't know me don't act like you do k? Mary80
  • Score: -3

2:38am Thu 27 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Mary80 wrote:
charrlee wrote:
Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person.
No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic!
Uh sorry but a cycle friendly lane compared to the 93 million pound cuts we're gonna be forced to endure don't even come close to the same. Yes the 1.7 million SHOULD have gone to essential services that have been drastically slashed. So hospitals should close due to lack of funds just so cyclists can have a cycle lane? Someone clearly don't live in the real world and how was what i said harsh? Don't you read this very paper that says the council is axing pretty much every service? Or are you one of those not affected by every cut the goverment are enforcing?

And you don't know me don't act like you do k?
To be honest, I would prefer they spent it on other things rather than the piece of rubbish they've left us with which isn't even close to wat they said it would be nor is it even close to the design we were shown.
[quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person. No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic![/p][/quote]Uh sorry but a cycle friendly lane compared to the 93 million pound cuts we're gonna be forced to endure don't even come close to the same. Yes the 1.7 million SHOULD have gone to essential services that have been drastically slashed. So hospitals should close due to lack of funds just so cyclists can have a cycle lane? Someone clearly don't live in the real world and how was what i said harsh? Don't you read this very paper that says the council is axing pretty much every service? Or are you one of those not affected by every cut the goverment are enforcing? And you don't know me don't act like you do k?[/p][/quote]To be honest, I would prefer they spent it on other things rather than the piece of rubbish they've left us with which isn't even close to wat they said it would be nor is it even close to the design we were shown. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

7:34am Thu 27 Feb 14

Forest Resident says...

Mary80 wrote:
No offence to cyclists but that 1.7 million could have been funneled back into essential services that are desperately in need of money like Social Services
Transport infrastructure IS essential service whether it's roads, cycle lane, or footpaths, admittedly cycle lanes wouldn't be so essential if there were not so many incompetent and inconsiderate drivers about which make it necessary to give cyclists dedicated infrastructure to try and afford them some safety.
[quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: No offence to cyclists but that 1.7 million could have been funneled back into essential services that are desperately in need of money like Social Services[/p][/quote]Transport infrastructure IS essential service whether it's roads, cycle lane, or footpaths, admittedly cycle lanes wouldn't be so essential if there were not so many incompetent and inconsiderate drivers about which make it necessary to give cyclists dedicated infrastructure to try and afford them some safety. Forest Resident
  • Score: 2

8:14am Thu 27 Feb 14

tootle says...

"Dan Soton says...

It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit.


As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones.

Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks."
20mph? There are parts of Southampton where one could only dream of driving at 20mph, there are other parts where if you decide to drive at or below the 30mph speed limit you will have horns beeping and cars overtaking dangerously. Nobody appears to police the current limits.
"Dan Soton says... It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit. As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones. Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks." 20mph? There are parts of Southampton where one could only dream of driving at 20mph, there are other parts where if you decide to drive at or below the 30mph speed limit you will have horns beeping and cars overtaking dangerously. Nobody appears to police the current limits. tootle
  • Score: 3

9:11am Thu 27 Feb 14

sotonboy84 says...

Forest Resident wrote:
Mary80 wrote:
No offence to cyclists but that 1.7 million could have been funneled back into essential services that are desperately in need of money like Social Services
Transport infrastructure IS essential service whether it's roads, cycle lane, or footpaths, admittedly cycle lanes wouldn't be so essential if there were not so many incompetent and inconsiderate drivers about which make it necessary to give cyclists dedicated infrastructure to try and afford them some safety.
So Mary80, putting it plainly, you would rather the money be spent on what you want rather than what might improve the city for others.

The funding was specifically for this cycle route so if the council didn't take it, they would have lost it and it couldn't have been spent on anything else.

The comments on here seem to suggest it was badly designed and if so, that's the council's fault and not the funding's.
[quote][p][bold]Forest Resident[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: No offence to cyclists but that 1.7 million could have been funneled back into essential services that are desperately in need of money like Social Services[/p][/quote]Transport infrastructure IS essential service whether it's roads, cycle lane, or footpaths, admittedly cycle lanes wouldn't be so essential if there were not so many incompetent and inconsiderate drivers about which make it necessary to give cyclists dedicated infrastructure to try and afford them some safety.[/p][/quote]So Mary80, putting it plainly, you would rather the money be spent on what you want rather than what might improve the city for others. The funding was specifically for this cycle route so if the council didn't take it, they would have lost it and it couldn't have been spent on anything else. The comments on here seem to suggest it was badly designed and if so, that's the council's fault and not the funding's. sotonboy84
  • Score: 1

10:29am Thu 27 Feb 14

Mr E says...

Perhaps the Echo could show some photos or diagrams of the junction rather than the generic blurred photo of a person on a pushbike.
Perhaps the Echo could show some photos or diagrams of the junction rather than the generic blurred photo of a person on a pushbike. Mr E
  • Score: 2

11:35am Thu 27 Feb 14

charrlee says...

Mary80 wrote:
charrlee wrote:
Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person.
No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic!
Uh sorry but a cycle friendly lane compared to the 93 million pound cuts we're gonna be forced to endure don't even come close to the same. Yes the 1.7 million SHOULD have gone to essential services that have been drastically slashed. So hospitals should close due to lack of funds just so cyclists can have a cycle lane? Someone clearly don't live in the real world and how was what i said harsh? Don't you read this very paper that says the council is axing pretty much every service? Or are you one of those not affected by every cut the goverment are enforcing?

And you don't know me don't act like you do k?
Oh. Perhaps you would rather I'd have said that most of what you write is ill-informed nonsense, and other forum users are always correcting you. What I admired was your confidence to say what was on your mind without worrying about whether or not you had your facts straight. My view has always been that controversy promotes discussion, which must be a good thing, and that the difference between todays fact and tomorrows fiction is anybody's guess.

Re-reading what I wrote does seem a bit patronising, I suppose, so I apologise to you for that.

To throw back at you what you have said to me : "you don't know me" either. There is no need for you to be mildly threatening, because I have no intention of trolling you, or being a nuisance.

When you comment in public, on an open forum, you are wide open to all the praise or insult that may come your way. Certain people last year tried to change that, but failed. They often went too far, they upset a lot of people. But is the forum better for being without them? Many would say yes, but I say I miss the excitement of watching the battles unfold. Much of what appears here now since "the cull" is rather dreary and uninteresting. It seems to me that some babies have been washed out with the bath water.

However, when you appear, the discussion livens up. No bad thing.

Again, no offence was intended. In future, I will agree, disagree or ignore what you say, like anyone else here would do.
[quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person. No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic![/p][/quote]Uh sorry but a cycle friendly lane compared to the 93 million pound cuts we're gonna be forced to endure don't even come close to the same. Yes the 1.7 million SHOULD have gone to essential services that have been drastically slashed. So hospitals should close due to lack of funds just so cyclists can have a cycle lane? Someone clearly don't live in the real world and how was what i said harsh? Don't you read this very paper that says the council is axing pretty much every service? Or are you one of those not affected by every cut the goverment are enforcing? And you don't know me don't act like you do k?[/p][/quote]Oh. Perhaps you would rather I'd have said that most of what you write is ill-informed nonsense, and other forum users are always correcting you. What I admired was your confidence to say what was on your mind without worrying about whether or not you had your facts straight. My view has always been that controversy promotes discussion, which must be a good thing, and that the difference between todays fact and tomorrows fiction is anybody's guess. Re-reading what I wrote does seem a bit patronising, I suppose, so I apologise to you for that. To throw back at you what you have said to me : "you don't know me" either. There is no need for you to be mildly threatening, because I have no intention of trolling you, or being a nuisance. When you comment in public, on an open forum, you are wide open to all the praise or insult that may come your way. Certain people last year tried to change that, but failed. They often went too far, they upset a lot of people. But is the forum better for being without them? Many would say yes, but I say I miss the excitement of watching the battles unfold. Much of what appears here now since "the cull" is rather dreary and uninteresting. It seems to me that some babies have been washed out with the bath water. However, when you appear, the discussion livens up. No bad thing. Again, no offence was intended. In future, I will agree, disagree or ignore what you say, like anyone else here would do. charrlee
  • Score: 2

1:14pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Dan Soton says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit.


As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones.

Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks.


-

April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton


http://www.dailyecho




.co.uk/news/10350582




.Cycle_junction_for_




major_road__potty__s




ay_motoring_groups




,,
Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.
Car pollution kills more people than car accidents.. has Southampton a credible plan to stop the EU fines?


It looks like Southampton's car drivers have copped a £19 million air pollution fine..

Being realistic.. I don't think they're going to cough up their portion of the fine, so that leaves me and the rest of the UKs 30 million taxpayers with a £300 million bill.. and lets not forget the extra billions in health costs!!



UK FACES £300M FINE OVER FAILURE TO MEET AIR POLLUTION TARGETS BY 2010.

IAN JOHNSTON Thursday 20 February 2014.

poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents.

"It is an invisible killer and it prevents many people from living a fully active life. It already costs Europe €330bn-€940bn (£277bn-£789bn) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year," he said

CITY-DWELLERS ARE PARTICULARLY EXPOSED, AS MOST NITROGEN DIOXIDE ORIGINATES IN TRAFFIC FUMES … AIR POLLUTION LIMITS ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDED IN 16 ZONES ACROSS THE UK.

The affected areas are Greater London, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Teesside, the Potteries, Hull, SOUTHAMPTON, Glasgow, the east, the south-east, the east Midlands, Merseyside, Yorkshire & Humberside, the west Midlands, and the north-east.

But the commission said that Britain had not presented any "credible and workable plan" for meeting air quality standards by 2015

-
http://www.theguardi


an.com/environment/2


014/feb/20/air-pollu


tion-european-commis


sion-legal-action-uk


-nitrogen-dioxide


-

Ginger.. Bike/people friendly cars are coming problem is Southampton has run out of time....
Well, all volvo's will soon be fitted with the upgraded collision prevention system that will avoid other vehicles, animals, pedestrians AND now cyclists by applying their brakes automatically, will hopefully prevent volvo drivers from tailgating us too.
Tootle says... There are parts of Southampton where one could only dream of driving at 20mph, there are other parts where if you decide to drive at or below the 30mph speed limit you will have horns beeping and cars overtaking dangerously. Nobody appears to police the current limits..


-

Southampton's average car journey speed was below 17.8mph In 2007

Total number of cars in the UK has risen from 19 million in 1971 to over 31 million in 2007, if growth continues on the same linear basis by 2020 there will be over 37 million cars in the UK. More optimistic projections based on accelerating population growth suggest that there could be 44 million cars by 2020.

Southampton's future is cars bumper to bumper the question is what can we do now to avoid it, I'd say a Citywide 20 mph speed limit now/today is me being optimistic.

If a 20 mph speed limit can make riding a bike safer who knows, I think it's worth a try..

As a last resort and in my opinion a worst case scenario... Self-Driving Cars or City Car Free Roads, forcing all car drivers to use public transport.


-


INCREASED CONGESTION MEANS THE AVERAGE SPEED IN OUR TOWNS IS NOW 17.8MPH.

by RAY MASSEY.
Last updated at 19:09 26 July 2007.

Britain's gridlocked roads are getting worse with traffic up as the average speed in major cities drops to just 17.8 mph.

Motorists are facing greater congestion as the gap widens even further between the Government's pledges on transport and the reality.

Today figures showed that of the 18 largest urban areas in England, excluding London, AVERAGE PEAK SPEEDS WERE LOWEST IN LEICESTER, BRISTOL AND SOUTHAMPTON.

-

http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/news/article-
471022/Increased-con
gestion-means-averag
e-speed-towns-17-8mp
h.html



,,,
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit. As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones. Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks. - April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton http://www.dailyecho .co.uk/news/10350582 .Cycle_junction_for_ major_road__potty__s ay_motoring_groups ,,[/p][/quote]Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.[/p][/quote]Car pollution kills more people than car accidents.. has Southampton a credible plan to stop the EU fines? It looks like Southampton's car drivers have copped a £19 million air pollution fine.. Being realistic.. I don't think they're going to cough up their portion of the fine, so that leaves me and the rest of the UKs 30 million taxpayers with a £300 million bill.. and lets not forget the extra billions in health costs!! UK FACES £300M FINE OVER FAILURE TO MEET AIR POLLUTION TARGETS BY 2010. IAN JOHNSTON Thursday 20 February 2014. poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents. "It is an invisible killer and it prevents many people from living a fully active life. It already costs Europe €330bn-€940bn (£277bn-£789bn) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year," he said CITY-DWELLERS ARE PARTICULARLY EXPOSED, AS MOST NITROGEN DIOXIDE ORIGINATES IN TRAFFIC FUMES … AIR POLLUTION LIMITS ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDED IN 16 ZONES ACROSS THE UK. The affected areas are Greater London, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Teesside, the Potteries, Hull, SOUTHAMPTON, Glasgow, the east, the south-east, the east Midlands, Merseyside, Yorkshire & Humberside, the west Midlands, and the north-east. But the commission said that Britain had not presented any "credible and workable plan" for meeting air quality standards by 2015 - http://www.theguardi an.com/environment/2 014/feb/20/air-pollu tion-european-commis sion-legal-action-uk -nitrogen-dioxide - Ginger.. Bike/people friendly cars are coming problem is Southampton has run out of time....[/p][/quote]Well, all volvo's will soon be fitted with the upgraded collision prevention system that will avoid other vehicles, animals, pedestrians AND now cyclists by applying their brakes automatically, will hopefully prevent volvo drivers from tailgating us too.[/p][/quote]Tootle says... There are parts of Southampton where one could only dream of driving at 20mph, there are other parts where if you decide to drive at or below the 30mph speed limit you will have horns beeping and cars overtaking dangerously. Nobody appears to police the current limits.. - Southampton's average car journey speed was below 17.8mph In 2007 Total number of cars in the UK has risen from 19 million in 1971 to over 31 million in 2007, if growth continues on the same linear basis by 2020 there will be over 37 million cars in the UK. More optimistic projections based on accelerating population growth suggest that there could be 44 million cars by 2020. Southampton's future is cars bumper to bumper the question is what can we do now to avoid it, I'd say a Citywide 20 mph speed limit now/today is me being optimistic. If a 20 mph speed limit can make riding a bike safer who knows, I think it's worth a try.. As a last resort and in my opinion a worst case scenario... Self-Driving Cars or City Car Free Roads, forcing all car drivers to use public transport. - INCREASED CONGESTION MEANS THE AVERAGE SPEED IN OUR TOWNS IS NOW 17.8MPH. by RAY MASSEY. Last updated at 19:09 26 July 2007. Britain's gridlocked roads are getting worse with traffic up as the average speed in major cities drops to just 17.8 mph. Motorists are facing greater congestion as the gap widens even further between the Government's pledges on transport and the reality. Today figures showed that of the 18 largest urban areas in England, excluding London, AVERAGE PEAK SPEEDS WERE LOWEST IN LEICESTER, BRISTOL AND SOUTHAMPTON. - http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 471022/Increased-con gestion-means-averag e-speed-towns-17-8mp h.html ,,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 1

1:33pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Inform Al says...

southamptonadi wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.
Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?
Think I said Winchester Road if you'ld like to open your eyes.
[quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.[/p][/quote]Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?[/p][/quote]Think I said Winchester Road if you'ld like to open your eyes. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

1:36pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

Dan Soton wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit.


As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones.

Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks.


-

April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton


http://www.dailyecho





.co.uk/news/10350582





.Cycle_junction_for_





major_road__potty__s





ay_motoring_groups




,,
Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.
Car pollution kills more people than car accidents.. has Southampton a credible plan to stop the EU fines?


It looks like Southampton's car drivers have copped a £19 million air pollution fine..

Being realistic.. I don't think they're going to cough up their portion of the fine, so that leaves me and the rest of the UKs 30 million taxpayers with a £300 million bill.. and lets not forget the extra billions in health costs!!



UK FACES £300M FINE OVER FAILURE TO MEET AIR POLLUTION TARGETS BY 2010.

IAN JOHNSTON Thursday 20 February 2014.

poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents.

"It is an invisible killer and it prevents many people from living a fully active life. It already costs Europe €330bn-€940bn (£277bn-£789bn) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year," he said

CITY-DWELLERS ARE PARTICULARLY EXPOSED, AS MOST NITROGEN DIOXIDE ORIGINATES IN TRAFFIC FUMES … AIR POLLUTION LIMITS ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDED IN 16 ZONES ACROSS THE UK.

The affected areas are Greater London, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Teesside, the Potteries, Hull, SOUTHAMPTON, Glasgow, the east, the south-east, the east Midlands, Merseyside, Yorkshire & Humberside, the west Midlands, and the north-east.

But the commission said that Britain had not presented any "credible and workable plan" for meeting air quality standards by 2015

-
http://www.theguardi



an.com/environment/2



014/feb/20/air-pollu



tion-european-commis



sion-legal-action-uk



-nitrogen-dioxide


-

Ginger.. Bike/people friendly cars are coming problem is Southampton has run out of time....
Well, all volvo's will soon be fitted with the upgraded collision prevention system that will avoid other vehicles, animals, pedestrians AND now cyclists by applying their brakes automatically, will hopefully prevent volvo drivers from tailgating us too.
Tootle says... There are parts of Southampton where one could only dream of driving at 20mph, there are other parts where if you decide to drive at or below the 30mph speed limit you will have horns beeping and cars overtaking dangerously. Nobody appears to police the current limits..


-

Southampton's average car journey speed was below 17.8mph In 2007

Total number of cars in the UK has risen from 19 million in 1971 to over 31 million in 2007, if growth continues on the same linear basis by 2020 there will be over 37 million cars in the UK. More optimistic projections based on accelerating population growth suggest that there could be 44 million cars by 2020.

Southampton's future is cars bumper to bumper the question is what can we do now to avoid it, I'd say a Citywide 20 mph speed limit now/today is me being optimistic.

If a 20 mph speed limit can make riding a bike safer who knows, I think it's worth a try..

As a last resort and in my opinion a worst case scenario... Self-Driving Cars or City Car Free Roads, forcing all car drivers to use public transport.


-


INCREASED CONGESTION MEANS THE AVERAGE SPEED IN OUR TOWNS IS NOW 17.8MPH.

by RAY MASSEY.
Last updated at 19:09 26 July 2007.

Britain's gridlocked roads are getting worse with traffic up as the average speed in major cities drops to just 17.8 mph.

Motorists are facing greater congestion as the gap widens even further between the Government's pledges on transport and the reality.

Today figures showed that of the 18 largest urban areas in England, excluding London, AVERAGE PEAK SPEEDS WERE LOWEST IN LEICESTER, BRISTOL AND SOUTHAMPTON.

-

http://www.dailymail

.co.uk/news/article-

471022/Increased-con

gestion-means-averag

e-speed-towns-17-8mp

h.html



,,,
Southampton's average car speed must be around 10mph now because during heavy traffic, any vehicles I pass on Bursledon road by Thornhill, I don't see again for the whole 4 mile ride and in moderate traffic, I stay about 5 to 10 vehicles ahead of anything I pass at the start of my ride and I normally average 11.5 to 14mph.
[quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit. As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones. Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks. - April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton http://www.dailyecho .co.uk/news/10350582 .Cycle_junction_for_ major_road__potty__s ay_motoring_groups ,,[/p][/quote]Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.[/p][/quote]Car pollution kills more people than car accidents.. has Southampton a credible plan to stop the EU fines? It looks like Southampton's car drivers have copped a £19 million air pollution fine.. Being realistic.. I don't think they're going to cough up their portion of the fine, so that leaves me and the rest of the UKs 30 million taxpayers with a £300 million bill.. and lets not forget the extra billions in health costs!! UK FACES £300M FINE OVER FAILURE TO MEET AIR POLLUTION TARGETS BY 2010. IAN JOHNSTON Thursday 20 February 2014. poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents. "It is an invisible killer and it prevents many people from living a fully active life. It already costs Europe €330bn-€940bn (£277bn-£789bn) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year," he said CITY-DWELLERS ARE PARTICULARLY EXPOSED, AS MOST NITROGEN DIOXIDE ORIGINATES IN TRAFFIC FUMES … AIR POLLUTION LIMITS ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDED IN 16 ZONES ACROSS THE UK. The affected areas are Greater London, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Teesside, the Potteries, Hull, SOUTHAMPTON, Glasgow, the east, the south-east, the east Midlands, Merseyside, Yorkshire & Humberside, the west Midlands, and the north-east. But the commission said that Britain had not presented any "credible and workable plan" for meeting air quality standards by 2015 - http://www.theguardi an.com/environment/2 014/feb/20/air-pollu tion-european-commis sion-legal-action-uk -nitrogen-dioxide - Ginger.. Bike/people friendly cars are coming problem is Southampton has run out of time....[/p][/quote]Well, all volvo's will soon be fitted with the upgraded collision prevention system that will avoid other vehicles, animals, pedestrians AND now cyclists by applying their brakes automatically, will hopefully prevent volvo drivers from tailgating us too.[/p][/quote]Tootle says... There are parts of Southampton where one could only dream of driving at 20mph, there are other parts where if you decide to drive at or below the 30mph speed limit you will have horns beeping and cars overtaking dangerously. Nobody appears to police the current limits.. - Southampton's average car journey speed was below 17.8mph In 2007 Total number of cars in the UK has risen from 19 million in 1971 to over 31 million in 2007, if growth continues on the same linear basis by 2020 there will be over 37 million cars in the UK. More optimistic projections based on accelerating population growth suggest that there could be 44 million cars by 2020. Southampton's future is cars bumper to bumper the question is what can we do now to avoid it, I'd say a Citywide 20 mph speed limit now/today is me being optimistic. If a 20 mph speed limit can make riding a bike safer who knows, I think it's worth a try.. As a last resort and in my opinion a worst case scenario... Self-Driving Cars or City Car Free Roads, forcing all car drivers to use public transport. - INCREASED CONGESTION MEANS THE AVERAGE SPEED IN OUR TOWNS IS NOW 17.8MPH. by RAY MASSEY. Last updated at 19:09 26 July 2007. Britain's gridlocked roads are getting worse with traffic up as the average speed in major cities drops to just 17.8 mph. Motorists are facing greater congestion as the gap widens even further between the Government's pledges on transport and the reality. Today figures showed that of the 18 largest urban areas in England, excluding London, AVERAGE PEAK SPEEDS WERE LOWEST IN LEICESTER, BRISTOL AND SOUTHAMPTON. - http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 471022/Increased-con gestion-means-averag e-speed-towns-17-8mp h.html ,,,[/p][/quote]Southampton's average car speed must be around 10mph now because during heavy traffic, any vehicles I pass on Bursledon road by Thornhill, I don't see again for the whole 4 mile ride and in moderate traffic, I stay about 5 to 10 vehicles ahead of anything I pass at the start of my ride and I normally average 11.5 to 14mph. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

2:03pm Thu 27 Feb 14

charrlee says...

It always amuses me how people thunder on about cars as though they have a life of their own!
May I suggest we examine the WHY and the WHAT FOR of car use? I would like to pre-empt the cycling fraternity who believe you can do everything on a bike, including a trip to the moon! Bless them.

So. Cars are used by doctors, social workers, teachers, district nurses and care workers, business people, taxi drivers, in short those who need a vehicle in connection with their work to carry a lot of stuff, and to get to places quickly. From a leisure/non-work point of view, they are used to take the family out, get shopping, and 1001 other tasks that would be either impossible or unreasonably arduous and time-consuming on a bus or bike.

And before you start, Gingercyclist, we've heard it all before. Insurance companies, when they have stopped laughing, will not cover the transportation of cellos/double basses in a cart attached to a bicycle! Do you remember that argument you had last year with someone? Jane, or somebody, I think. The incontrovertible fact will always remain that you can get a vast amount more done in a day using a car than you can using a bike or public transport.

The private car gives you so much more scope, and opens the door to a vast array of possibilities. Much more of this bad weather and most cyclists will be returning to their cars. People don't like puffed-out visitors dripping water all over their step and hallways!
It always amuses me how people thunder on about cars as though they have a life of their own! May I suggest we examine the WHY and the WHAT FOR of car use? I would like to pre-empt the cycling fraternity who believe you can do everything on a bike, including a trip to the moon! Bless them. So. Cars are used by doctors, social workers, teachers, district nurses and care workers, business people, taxi drivers, in short those who need a vehicle in connection with their work to carry a lot of stuff, and to get to places quickly. From a leisure/non-work point of view, they are used to take the family out, get shopping, and 1001 other tasks that would be either impossible or unreasonably arduous and time-consuming on a bus or bike. And before you start, Gingercyclist, we've heard it all before. Insurance companies, when they have stopped laughing, will not cover the transportation of cellos/double basses in a cart attached to a bicycle! Do you remember that argument you had last year with someone? Jane, or somebody, I think. The incontrovertible fact will always remain that you can get a vast amount more done in a day using a car than you can using a bike or public transport. The private car gives you so much more scope, and opens the door to a vast array of possibilities. Much more of this bad weather and most cyclists will be returning to their cars. People don't like puffed-out visitors dripping water all over their step and hallways! charrlee
  • Score: 3

2:17pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Inform Al says...

charrlee wrote:
It always amuses me how people thunder on about cars as though they have a life of their own!
May I suggest we examine the WHY and the WHAT FOR of car use? I would like to pre-empt the cycling fraternity who believe you can do everything on a bike, including a trip to the moon! Bless them.

So. Cars are used by doctors, social workers, teachers, district nurses and care workers, business people, taxi drivers, in short those who need a vehicle in connection with their work to carry a lot of stuff, and to get to places quickly. From a leisure/non-work point of view, they are used to take the family out, get shopping, and 1001 other tasks that would be either impossible or unreasonably arduous and time-consuming on a bus or bike.

And before you start, Gingercyclist, we've heard it all before. Insurance companies, when they have stopped laughing, will not cover the transportation of cellos/double basses in a cart attached to a bicycle! Do you remember that argument you had last year with someone? Jane, or somebody, I think. The incontrovertible fact will always remain that you can get a vast amount more done in a day using a car than you can using a bike or public transport.

The private car gives you so much more scope, and opens the door to a vast array of possibilities. Much more of this bad weather and most cyclists will be returning to their cars. People don't like puffed-out visitors dripping water all over their step and hallways!
Fully agree, I myself only use my car for my monthly midnight shop or for going to Kent visiting sons and grandchildren. The rest of the time I either walk or if raining heavily catch a bus, on the rare occasion that the number 5 turns up that is. When I forget my allergy to exercise I have even been known to ride a bike. In my recent experience most car drivers do not use their cars more than is necessary.
[quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: It always amuses me how people thunder on about cars as though they have a life of their own! May I suggest we examine the WHY and the WHAT FOR of car use? I would like to pre-empt the cycling fraternity who believe you can do everything on a bike, including a trip to the moon! Bless them. So. Cars are used by doctors, social workers, teachers, district nurses and care workers, business people, taxi drivers, in short those who need a vehicle in connection with their work to carry a lot of stuff, and to get to places quickly. From a leisure/non-work point of view, they are used to take the family out, get shopping, and 1001 other tasks that would be either impossible or unreasonably arduous and time-consuming on a bus or bike. And before you start, Gingercyclist, we've heard it all before. Insurance companies, when they have stopped laughing, will not cover the transportation of cellos/double basses in a cart attached to a bicycle! Do you remember that argument you had last year with someone? Jane, or somebody, I think. The incontrovertible fact will always remain that you can get a vast amount more done in a day using a car than you can using a bike or public transport. The private car gives you so much more scope, and opens the door to a vast array of possibilities. Much more of this bad weather and most cyclists will be returning to their cars. People don't like puffed-out visitors dripping water all over their step and hallways![/p][/quote]Fully agree, I myself only use my car for my monthly midnight shop or for going to Kent visiting sons and grandchildren. The rest of the time I either walk or if raining heavily catch a bus, on the rare occasion that the number 5 turns up that is. When I forget my allergy to exercise I have even been known to ride a bike. In my recent experience most car drivers do not use their cars more than is necessary. Inform Al
  • Score: 1

2:23pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Positively4thStreet says...

charrlee wrote:
Mary80 wrote:
charrlee wrote:
Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person.
No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic!
Uh sorry but a cycle friendly lane compared to the 93 million pound cuts we're gonna be forced to endure don't even come close to the same. Yes the 1.7 million SHOULD have gone to essential services that have been drastically slashed. So hospitals should close due to lack of funds just so cyclists can have a cycle lane? Someone clearly don't live in the real world and how was what i said harsh? Don't you read this very paper that says the council is axing pretty much every service? Or are you one of those not affected by every cut the goverment are enforcing?

And you don't know me don't act like you do k?
Oh. Perhaps you would rather I'd have said that most of what you write is ill-informed nonsense, and other forum users are always correcting you. What I admired was your confidence to say what was on your mind without worrying about whether or not you had your facts straight. My view has always been that controversy promotes discussion, which must be a good thing, and that the difference between todays fact and tomorrows fiction is anybody's guess.

Re-reading what I wrote does seem a bit patronising, I suppose, so I apologise to you for that.

To throw back at you what you have said to me : "you don't know me" either. There is no need for you to be mildly threatening, because I have no intention of trolling you, or being a nuisance.

When you comment in public, on an open forum, you are wide open to all the praise or insult that may come your way. Certain people last year tried to change that, but failed. They often went too far, they upset a lot of people. But is the forum better for being without them? Many would say yes, but I say I miss the excitement of watching the battles unfold. Much of what appears here now since "the cull" is rather dreary and uninteresting. It seems to me that some babies have been washed out with the bath water.

However, when you appear, the discussion livens up. No bad thing.

Again, no offence was intended. In future, I will agree, disagree or ignore what you say, like anyone else here would do.
A level headed,balanced,and magnanimous post Charrlee..like it.
[quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person. No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic![/p][/quote]Uh sorry but a cycle friendly lane compared to the 93 million pound cuts we're gonna be forced to endure don't even come close to the same. Yes the 1.7 million SHOULD have gone to essential services that have been drastically slashed. So hospitals should close due to lack of funds just so cyclists can have a cycle lane? Someone clearly don't live in the real world and how was what i said harsh? Don't you read this very paper that says the council is axing pretty much every service? Or are you one of those not affected by every cut the goverment are enforcing? And you don't know me don't act like you do k?[/p][/quote]Oh. Perhaps you would rather I'd have said that most of what you write is ill-informed nonsense, and other forum users are always correcting you. What I admired was your confidence to say what was on your mind without worrying about whether or not you had your facts straight. My view has always been that controversy promotes discussion, which must be a good thing, and that the difference between todays fact and tomorrows fiction is anybody's guess. Re-reading what I wrote does seem a bit patronising, I suppose, so I apologise to you for that. To throw back at you what you have said to me : "you don't know me" either. There is no need for you to be mildly threatening, because I have no intention of trolling you, or being a nuisance. When you comment in public, on an open forum, you are wide open to all the praise or insult that may come your way. Certain people last year tried to change that, but failed. They often went too far, they upset a lot of people. But is the forum better for being without them? Many would say yes, but I say I miss the excitement of watching the battles unfold. Much of what appears here now since "the cull" is rather dreary and uninteresting. It seems to me that some babies have been washed out with the bath water. However, when you appear, the discussion livens up. No bad thing. Again, no offence was intended. In future, I will agree, disagree or ignore what you say, like anyone else here would do.[/p][/quote]A level headed,balanced,and magnanimous post Charrlee..like it. Positively4thStreet
  • Score: 2

2:44pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Positively4thStreet says...

It's widely acknowledged that if drivers were to maintain a steady 70 mph on motorways,instead of the 80 or 90 mph that we are used to,that traffic flow on the motorway would be far more fluid,there would be less congestion,and people would reach their destinations no later,or even sooner.
It might follow therefore,that the introduction of a 20 mph speed limit in towns,might actually raise the average speed of journey times ,make them quicker,reduce pollution by reducing standing traffic queues, and (joy of joys) by default, almost certainly improve conditions for cycling.
It's widely acknowledged that if drivers were to maintain a steady 70 mph on motorways,instead of the 80 or 90 mph that we are used to,that traffic flow on the motorway would be far more fluid,there would be less congestion,and people would reach their destinations no later,or even sooner. It might follow therefore,that the introduction of a 20 mph speed limit in towns,might actually raise the average speed of journey times ,make them quicker,reduce pollution by reducing standing traffic queues, and (joy of joys) by default, almost certainly improve conditions for cycling. Positively4thStreet
  • Score: 5

4:55pm Thu 27 Feb 14

southamptonadi says...

Inform Al wrote:
southamptonadi wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.
Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?
Think I said Winchester Road if you'ld like to open your eyes.
My eyes are wide open thanks. I'll rephrase for you where on Winchester road is this really wide cycle lane. I hate pavement riders but Would like to know where this lane is.
[quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.[/p][/quote]Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?[/p][/quote]Think I said Winchester Road if you'ld like to open your eyes.[/p][/quote]My eyes are wide open thanks. I'll rephrase for you where on Winchester road is this really wide cycle lane. I hate pavement riders but Would like to know where this lane is. southamptonadi
  • Score: 2

5:19pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

southamptonadi wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
southamptonadi wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.
Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?
Think I said Winchester Road if you'ld like to open your eyes.
My eyes are wide open thanks. I'll rephrase for you where on Winchester road is this really wide cycle lane. I hate pavement riders but Would like to know where this lane is.
This one that gets encroached by large vehicles at pinch points, gets used as extra parking spaces, is in the door zone of parked cars by the cycle link path between Thornhill road and Winchester road where the lane ends for no reason and it ends abruptly in other stupid places, though it is only a few inches narrower than a small car, so I'll give him that one about it being wider than most cycle lanes in Southampton, also the markings closest to the Hill lane end are severely faded, either way, it's not fit for purpose in places but is somewhat usable.

Here's a link to point where the lane starts at the Bassett Avenue end.
https://www.google.c
o.uk/maps/@50.940376
,-1.407845,3a,75y,22
9.49h,61.39t/data=!3
m4!1e1!3m2!1sQJjcxTD
h-fymrzLh_ywTYw!2e0/
data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s
7SrpaYmppT_OWSVqE7yD
Hw!2e0
[quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.[/p][/quote]Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?[/p][/quote]Think I said Winchester Road if you'ld like to open your eyes.[/p][/quote]My eyes are wide open thanks. I'll rephrase for you where on Winchester road is this really wide cycle lane. I hate pavement riders but Would like to know where this lane is.[/p][/quote]This one that gets encroached by large vehicles at pinch points, gets used as extra parking spaces, is in the door zone of parked cars by the cycle link path between Thornhill road and Winchester road where the lane ends for no reason and it ends abruptly in other stupid places, though it is only a few inches narrower than a small car, so I'll give him that one about it being wider than most cycle lanes in Southampton, also the markings closest to the Hill lane end are severely faded, either way, it's not fit for purpose in places but is somewhat usable. Here's a link to point where the lane starts at the Bassett Avenue end. https://www.google.c o.uk/maps/@50.940376 ,-1.407845,3a,75y,22 9.49h,61.39t/data=!3 m4!1e1!3m2!1sQJjcxTD h-fymrzLh_ywTYw!2e0/ data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s 7SrpaYmppT_OWSVqE7yD Hw!2e0 Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -1

5:34pm Thu 27 Feb 14

southamptonadi says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
southamptonadi wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
southamptonadi wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.
Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?
Think I said Winchester Road if you'ld like to open your eyes.
My eyes are wide open thanks. I'll rephrase for you where on Winchester road is this really wide cycle lane. I hate pavement riders but Would like to know where this lane is.
This one that gets encroached by large vehicles at pinch points, gets used as extra parking spaces, is in the door zone of parked cars by the cycle link path between Thornhill road and Winchester road where the lane ends for no reason and it ends abruptly in other stupid places, though it is only a few inches narrower than a small car, so I'll give him that one about it being wider than most cycle lanes in Southampton, also the markings closest to the Hill lane end are severely faded, either way, it's not fit for purpose in places but is somewhat usable.

Here's a link to point where the lane starts at the Bassett Avenue end.
https://www.google.c

o.uk/maps/@50.940376

,-1.407845,3a,75y,22

9.49h,61.39t/data=!3

m4!1e1!3m2!1sQJjcxTD

h-fymrzLh_ywTYw!2e0/

data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s

7SrpaYmppT_OWSVqE7yD

Hw!2e0
Thank you, learned something new , I really thought Winchester road ended at the roundabout. Thought I originally asked quite nicely but thank you for clearing that up.

I don't generally cycle that way but I'm sure that's the lane that at the pinch points throws you and the cars into one small space where if a car overtakes you just prior to the pinch point you have no where to go. Or have they redesigned it.

I've not cycled the new crossroads at the bridge but surely if you are going right but keep left, if your lucky enough to survive being left hooked , you then stop turn the bike ninety degrees all in a live lane, if your still upright you then wait for green light and risk being left hooked again by angry motorists because they think you've pushed in and got in their way.

I only ever go straight on thank god,

I do have one concern if you have a recumbent trike or trailer especially a child trailer you can't follow the lane through bus stop, if that's a good idea anyway, you have to battle with the bus for space,
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.[/p][/quote]Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?[/p][/quote]Think I said Winchester Road if you'ld like to open your eyes.[/p][/quote]My eyes are wide open thanks. I'll rephrase for you where on Winchester road is this really wide cycle lane. I hate pavement riders but Would like to know where this lane is.[/p][/quote]This one that gets encroached by large vehicles at pinch points, gets used as extra parking spaces, is in the door zone of parked cars by the cycle link path between Thornhill road and Winchester road where the lane ends for no reason and it ends abruptly in other stupid places, though it is only a few inches narrower than a small car, so I'll give him that one about it being wider than most cycle lanes in Southampton, also the markings closest to the Hill lane end are severely faded, either way, it's not fit for purpose in places but is somewhat usable. Here's a link to point where the lane starts at the Bassett Avenue end. https://www.google.c o.uk/maps/@50.940376 ,-1.407845,3a,75y,22 9.49h,61.39t/data=!3 m4!1e1!3m2!1sQJjcxTD h-fymrzLh_ywTYw!2e0/ data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s 7SrpaYmppT_OWSVqE7yD Hw!2e0[/p][/quote]Thank you, learned something new , I really thought Winchester road ended at the roundabout. Thought I originally asked quite nicely but thank you for clearing that up. I don't generally cycle that way but I'm sure that's the lane that at the pinch points throws you and the cars into one small space where if a car overtakes you just prior to the pinch point you have no where to go. Or have they redesigned it. I've not cycled the new crossroads at the bridge but surely if you are going right but keep left, if your lucky enough to survive being left hooked , you then stop turn the bike ninety degrees all in a live lane, if your still upright you then wait for green light and risk being left hooked again by angry motorists because they think you've pushed in and got in their way. I only ever go straight on thank god, I do have one concern if you have a recumbent trike or trailer especially a child trailer you can't follow the lane through bus stop, if that's a good idea anyway, you have to battle with the bus for space, southamptonadi
  • Score: 1

5:39pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Ginger_cyclist says...

southamptonadi wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
southamptonadi wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
southamptonadi wrote:
Inform Al wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
RomseyKeith wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish.
People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.
It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.
Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.
Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?
Think I said Winchester Road if you'ld like to open your eyes.
My eyes are wide open thanks. I'll rephrase for you where on Winchester road is this really wide cycle lane. I hate pavement riders but Would like to know where this lane is.
This one that gets encroached by large vehicles at pinch points, gets used as extra parking spaces, is in the door zone of parked cars by the cycle link path between Thornhill road and Winchester road where the lane ends for no reason and it ends abruptly in other stupid places, though it is only a few inches narrower than a small car, so I'll give him that one about it being wider than most cycle lanes in Southampton, also the markings closest to the Hill lane end are severely faded, either way, it's not fit for purpose in places but is somewhat usable.

Here's a link to point where the lane starts at the Bassett Avenue end.
https://www.google.c


o.uk/maps/@50.940376


,-1.407845,3a,75y,22


9.49h,61.39t/data=!3


m4!1e1!3m2!1sQJjcxTD


h-fymrzLh_ywTYw!2e0/


data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s


7SrpaYmppT_OWSVqE7yD


Hw!2e0
Thank you, learned something new , I really thought Winchester road ended at the roundabout. Thought I originally asked quite nicely but thank you for clearing that up.

I don't generally cycle that way but I'm sure that's the lane that at the pinch points throws you and the cars into one small space where if a car overtakes you just prior to the pinch point you have no where to go. Or have they redesigned it.

I've not cycled the new crossroads at the bridge but surely if you are going right but keep left, if your lucky enough to survive being left hooked , you then stop turn the bike ninety degrees all in a live lane, if your still upright you then wait for green light and risk being left hooked again by angry motorists because they think you've pushed in and got in their way.

I only ever go straight on thank god,

I do have one concern if you have a recumbent trike or trailer especially a child trailer you can't follow the lane through bus stop, if that's a good idea anyway, you have to battle with the bus for space,
Not sure, thankfully I've never needed to use that road.
As for the junction, I agree, it's a death waiting to happen, the cycle lanes and bus bypasses aren't wide enough and as you say, some motorists will get angry at right turning cyclists who use the assisted right turns, think that they've pushed in front when they're actually following the layout design which is an American enspired idea.
[quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Inform Al[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]RomseyKeith[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]True. But I've seen cyclists go straight through red lights at pedestrian crossings and hit pedestrians who are using that crossing. Each time the cyclist then has a go at that pedestrian, despite the fact that they've ignored the red light which applies to all road users. Cyclists aren't innocent. Drivers these days though are very impatient, very aggressive, and very selfish. People just need more patience and tollerance of others, and not view simple things like someone getting one car ahead as a failure.[/p][/quote]It's not very often though that cyclists hit pedestrians but I agree, people these days are rushing around too much, like the ford galaxy driver that I saw blast through a red light on a pedestrian/cycle crossing by the west quay car park entrance, which is where they were heading, people also don't pay attention to what they do, like the countless pedestrians who I've had step out in front of me without looking.[/p][/quote]Yes, like the idiot cyclist that brushed past me on the pavement the other night alongside the widest cycle lane I have ever seen in Winchester Road. If I had even just moved a fraction towards the road there would have been just another unreported pedestrian/cyclist accident. Must admit I wasn't looking but there again I had no intention of crossing the road or stepping into the cycle lane.[/p][/quote]Out of interest where is this really wide cycle lane?[/p][/quote]Think I said Winchester Road if you'ld like to open your eyes.[/p][/quote]My eyes are wide open thanks. I'll rephrase for you where on Winchester road is this really wide cycle lane. I hate pavement riders but Would like to know where this lane is.[/p][/quote]This one that gets encroached by large vehicles at pinch points, gets used as extra parking spaces, is in the door zone of parked cars by the cycle link path between Thornhill road and Winchester road where the lane ends for no reason and it ends abruptly in other stupid places, though it is only a few inches narrower than a small car, so I'll give him that one about it being wider than most cycle lanes in Southampton, also the markings closest to the Hill lane end are severely faded, either way, it's not fit for purpose in places but is somewhat usable. Here's a link to point where the lane starts at the Bassett Avenue end. https://www.google.c o.uk/maps/@50.940376 ,-1.407845,3a,75y,22 9.49h,61.39t/data=!3 m4!1e1!3m2!1sQJjcxTD h-fymrzLh_ywTYw!2e0/ data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s 7SrpaYmppT_OWSVqE7yD Hw!2e0[/p][/quote]Thank you, learned something new , I really thought Winchester road ended at the roundabout. Thought I originally asked quite nicely but thank you for clearing that up. I don't generally cycle that way but I'm sure that's the lane that at the pinch points throws you and the cars into one small space where if a car overtakes you just prior to the pinch point you have no where to go. Or have they redesigned it. I've not cycled the new crossroads at the bridge but surely if you are going right but keep left, if your lucky enough to survive being left hooked , you then stop turn the bike ninety degrees all in a live lane, if your still upright you then wait for green light and risk being left hooked again by angry motorists because they think you've pushed in and got in their way. I only ever go straight on thank god, I do have one concern if you have a recumbent trike or trailer especially a child trailer you can't follow the lane through bus stop, if that's a good idea anyway, you have to battle with the bus for space,[/p][/quote]Not sure, thankfully I've never needed to use that road. As for the junction, I agree, it's a death waiting to happen, the cycle lanes and bus bypasses aren't wide enough and as you say, some motorists will get angry at right turning cyclists who use the assisted right turns, think that they've pushed in front when they're actually following the layout design which is an American enspired idea. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 0

7:44pm Thu 27 Feb 14

geoff51 says...

hmw wrote:
charrlee wrote:
Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person.
No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic!
Unlike geoff51, who in real life harbours a secret fetish for cyclists and likes to dress his hand in lycra and fist himself
****!
[quote][p][bold]hmw[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person. No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic![/p][/quote]Unlike geoff51, who in real life harbours a secret fetish for cyclists and likes to dress his hand in lycra and fist himself[/p][/quote]****! geoff51
  • Score: -1

7:50pm Thu 27 Feb 14

geoff51 says...

geoff51 wrote:
hmw wrote:
charrlee wrote:
Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person.
No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic!
Unlike geoff51, who in real life harbours a secret fetish for cyclists and likes to dress his hand in lycra and fist himself
****!
Sorry Wanckor!
[quote][p][bold]geoff51[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]hmw[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]charrlee[/bold] wrote: Isn't Mary a hoot? In real life, I imagine she is the kind girl who sees a swimming pool on a hot day, runs over and jumps in, only then realising she is still wearing clothes! She's definitely a shoot first-ask questions afterwards kind of person. No offence, Mary. I don't always agree with you, but I do enjoy reading your points of view. I love it when you say "I'm sorry but......" and then go on to say something harsh. Classic![/p][/quote]Unlike geoff51, who in real life harbours a secret fetish for cyclists and likes to dress his hand in lycra and fist himself[/p][/quote]****![/p][/quote]Sorry Wanckor! geoff51
  • Score: -1

8:43pm Thu 27 Feb 14

Dan Soton says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Dan Soton wrote:
It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit.


As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones.

Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks.


-

April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton


http://www.dailyecho






.co.uk/news/10350582






.Cycle_junction_for_






major_road__potty__s






ay_motoring_groups




,,
Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.
Car pollution kills more people than car accidents.. has Southampton a credible plan to stop the EU fines?


It looks like Southampton's car drivers have copped a £19 million air pollution fine..

Being realistic.. I don't think they're going to cough up their portion of the fine, so that leaves me and the rest of the UKs 30 million taxpayers with a £300 million bill.. and lets not forget the extra billions in health costs!!



UK FACES £300M FINE OVER FAILURE TO MEET AIR POLLUTION TARGETS BY 2010.

IAN JOHNSTON Thursday 20 February 2014.

poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents.

"It is an invisible killer and it prevents many people from living a fully active life. It already costs Europe €330bn-€940bn (£277bn-£789bn) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year," he said

CITY-DWELLERS ARE PARTICULARLY EXPOSED, AS MOST NITROGEN DIOXIDE ORIGINATES IN TRAFFIC FUMES … AIR POLLUTION LIMITS ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDED IN 16 ZONES ACROSS THE UK.

The affected areas are Greater London, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Teesside, the Potteries, Hull, SOUTHAMPTON, Glasgow, the east, the south-east, the east Midlands, Merseyside, Yorkshire & Humberside, the west Midlands, and the north-east.

But the commission said that Britain had not presented any "credible and workable plan" for meeting air quality standards by 2015

-
http://www.theguardi




an.com/environment/2




014/feb/20/air-pollu




tion-european-commis




sion-legal-action-uk




-nitrogen-dioxide


-

Ginger.. Bike/people friendly cars are coming problem is Southampton has run out of time....
Well, all volvo's will soon be fitted with the upgraded collision prevention system that will avoid other vehicles, animals, pedestrians AND now cyclists by applying their brakes automatically, will hopefully prevent volvo drivers from tailgating us too.
Tootle says... There are parts of Southampton where one could only dream of driving at 20mph, there are other parts where if you decide to drive at or below the 30mph speed limit you will have horns beeping and cars overtaking dangerously. Nobody appears to police the current limits..


-

Southampton's average car journey speed was below 17.8mph In 2007

Total number of cars in the UK has risen from 19 million in 1971 to over 31 million in 2007, if growth continues on the same linear basis by 2020 there will be over 37 million cars in the UK. More optimistic projections based on accelerating population growth suggest that there could be 44 million cars by 2020.

Southampton's future is cars bumper to bumper the question is what can we do now to avoid it, I'd say a Citywide 20 mph speed limit now/today is me being optimistic.

If a 20 mph speed limit can make riding a bike safer who knows, I think it's worth a try..

As a last resort and in my opinion a worst case scenario... Self-Driving Cars or City Car Free Roads, forcing all car drivers to use public transport.


-


INCREASED CONGESTION MEANS THE AVERAGE SPEED IN OUR TOWNS IS NOW 17.8MPH.

by RAY MASSEY.
Last updated at 19:09 26 July 2007.

Britain's gridlocked roads are getting worse with traffic up as the average speed in major cities drops to just 17.8 mph.

Motorists are facing greater congestion as the gap widens even further between the Government's pledges on transport and the reality.

Today figures showed that of the 18 largest urban areas in England, excluding London, AVERAGE PEAK SPEEDS WERE LOWEST IN LEICESTER, BRISTOL AND SOUTHAMPTON.

-

http://www.dailymail


.co.uk/news/article-


471022/Increased-con


gestion-means-averag


e-speed-towns-17-8mp


h.html



,,,
Southampton's average car speed must be around 10mph now because during heavy traffic, any vehicles I pass on Bursledon road by Thornhill, I don't see again for the whole 4 mile ride and in moderate traffic, I stay about 5 to 10 vehicles ahead of anything I pass at the start of my ride and I normally average 11.5 to 14mph.
It's a no brainer... 20 mph speed limits save lives and reduce injuries.


If statistical proof was needed.. excluding London, Bristol and Southampton have the lowest peak traffic speeds in the UK ( I'm sure everyone here agrees with that ) yet Bristol's 20 mph speed zones are improving pedestrian and cycle safety"..

-


MORE BRISTOL 20MPH SPEED LIMIT ZONES IDENTIFIED.

27 February 2014 Last updated at 12:21.

Bristol mayor George Ferguson hopes the move will encourage more cyclists.

A council spokesman said the 20 mph limits are being introduced to "reduce the risk and severity of collision".

Pilot zones were set up in Bedminster and east Bristol three years ago but by last August police had not issued any 20 mph speeding fines in those areas.

CITY MAYOR GEORGE FERGUSON SAID THE PILOTS SHOWED "REDUCED SPEED LIMITS CAN AND DO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE SAFETY".

The proposals are part of a city-wide roll-out, due to be completed by March next year.

-

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-england-bri
stol-26366492

-


Come on Southampton bring on the Citywide 20 mph speed limit, hugely expensive Dutch-style roads can wait...


,,,
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dan Soton[/bold] wrote: It's a no brainer... Southampton should introduce a Citywide 20 mph speed limit. As I advocated back in April 2013... If Southampton's top priority is to reduce road accidents with Dutch-style roads where's the Dutch car speed limits, Amsterdam has 19 mph and 9 mph home zones. Highly lordable as the £1.7 million cycle highway project is I'd rather see that money funding a Citywide 20 mph speed limit to reduce road accidents thus (knock on effect) freeing up the emergency services for more vital tasks. - April 2013... 'Dutch style' cyclist friendly junction planned for western end of Itchen Bridge in Southampton http://www.dailyecho .co.uk/news/10350582 .Cycle_junction_for_ major_road__potty__s ay_motoring_groups ,,[/p][/quote]Yep, promised us one thing, designed something different to show us and then gave us something totally different to that.[/p][/quote]Car pollution kills more people than car accidents.. has Southampton a credible plan to stop the EU fines? It looks like Southampton's car drivers have copped a £19 million air pollution fine.. Being realistic.. I don't think they're going to cough up their portion of the fine, so that leaves me and the rest of the UKs 30 million taxpayers with a £300 million bill.. and lets not forget the extra billions in health costs!! UK FACES £300M FINE OVER FAILURE TO MEET AIR POLLUTION TARGETS BY 2010. IAN JOHNSTON Thursday 20 February 2014. poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents. "It is an invisible killer and it prevents many people from living a fully active life. It already costs Europe €330bn-€940bn (£277bn-£789bn) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year," he said CITY-DWELLERS ARE PARTICULARLY EXPOSED, AS MOST NITROGEN DIOXIDE ORIGINATES IN TRAFFIC FUMES … AIR POLLUTION LIMITS ARE REGULARLY EXCEEDED IN 16 ZONES ACROSS THE UK. The affected areas are Greater London, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Teesside, the Potteries, Hull, SOUTHAMPTON, Glasgow, the east, the south-east, the east Midlands, Merseyside, Yorkshire & Humberside, the west Midlands, and the north-east. But the commission said that Britain had not presented any "credible and workable plan" for meeting air quality standards by 2015 - http://www.theguardi an.com/environment/2 014/feb/20/air-pollu tion-european-commis sion-legal-action-uk -nitrogen-dioxide - Ginger.. Bike/people friendly cars are coming problem is Southampton has run out of time....[/p][/quote]Well, all volvo's will soon be fitted with the upgraded collision prevention system that will avoid other vehicles, animals, pedestrians AND now cyclists by applying their brakes automatically, will hopefully prevent volvo drivers from tailgating us too.[/p][/quote]Tootle says... There are parts of Southampton where one could only dream of driving at 20mph, there are other parts where if you decide to drive at or below the 30mph speed limit you will have horns beeping and cars overtaking dangerously. Nobody appears to police the current limits.. - Southampton's average car journey speed was below 17.8mph In 2007 Total number of cars in the UK has risen from 19 million in 1971 to over 31 million in 2007, if growth continues on the same linear basis by 2020 there will be over 37 million cars in the UK. More optimistic projections based on accelerating population growth suggest that there could be 44 million cars by 2020. Southampton's future is cars bumper to bumper the question is what can we do now to avoid it, I'd say a Citywide 20 mph speed limit now/today is me being optimistic. If a 20 mph speed limit can make riding a bike safer who knows, I think it's worth a try.. As a last resort and in my opinion a worst case scenario... Self-Driving Cars or City Car Free Roads, forcing all car drivers to use public transport. - INCREASED CONGESTION MEANS THE AVERAGE SPEED IN OUR TOWNS IS NOW 17.8MPH. by RAY MASSEY. Last updated at 19:09 26 July 2007. Britain's gridlocked roads are getting worse with traffic up as the average speed in major cities drops to just 17.8 mph. Motorists are facing greater congestion as the gap widens even further between the Government's pledges on transport and the reality. Today figures showed that of the 18 largest urban areas in England, excluding London, AVERAGE PEAK SPEEDS WERE LOWEST IN LEICESTER, BRISTOL AND SOUTHAMPTON. - http://www.dailymail .co.uk/news/article- 471022/Increased-con gestion-means-averag e-speed-towns-17-8mp h.html ,,,[/p][/quote]Southampton's average car speed must be around 10mph now because during heavy traffic, any vehicles I pass on Bursledon road by Thornhill, I don't see again for the whole 4 mile ride and in moderate traffic, I stay about 5 to 10 vehicles ahead of anything I pass at the start of my ride and I normally average 11.5 to 14mph.[/p][/quote]It's a no brainer... 20 mph speed limits save lives and reduce injuries. If statistical proof was needed.. excluding London, Bristol and Southampton have the lowest peak traffic speeds in the UK ( I'm sure everyone here agrees with that ) yet Bristol's 20 mph speed zones are improving pedestrian and cycle safety".. - MORE BRISTOL 20MPH SPEED LIMIT ZONES IDENTIFIED. 27 February 2014 Last updated at 12:21. Bristol mayor George Ferguson hopes the move will encourage more cyclists. A council spokesman said the 20 mph limits are being introduced to "reduce the risk and severity of collision". Pilot zones were set up in Bedminster and east Bristol three years ago but by last August police had not issued any 20 mph speeding fines in those areas. CITY MAYOR GEORGE FERGUSON SAID THE PILOTS SHOWED "REDUCED SPEED LIMITS CAN AND DO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLE SAFETY". The proposals are part of a city-wide roll-out, due to be completed by March next year. - http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-england-bri stol-26366492 - Come on Southampton bring on the Citywide 20 mph speed limit, hugely expensive Dutch-style roads can wait... ,,, Dan Soton
  • Score: 4

12:52pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Taskforce 141 says...

What an absolute clusterfcuk from a council who hasn't a clue!
What an absolute clusterfcuk from a council who hasn't a clue! Taskforce 141
  • Score: 0

12:40pm Tue 11 Mar 14

The_Fuzz22 says...

gilbertratchet wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
gilbertratchet wrote:
camerajuan wrote:
As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off.

Brilliant!
One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.
Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?
No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.
"Cyclist propaganda"

Now I've read everything.
[quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gilbertratchet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]camerajuan[/bold] wrote: As if we needed any more confirmation that it's motorists who are the menace, one knocks a cyclist over and drives off. Brilliant![/p][/quote]One. Like you said, one. Hardly confirmation.[/p][/quote]Been hundreds like it in the papers, is that confirmation enough for you? What about the hundreds of thousands that involve pedestrians instead of cyclists?[/p][/quote]No. I don't care for cyclist propaganda, especially when spouted by someone who doesn't understand what confirmation bias is. The number of incidents of a cyclist NOT being knocked off by a motorist outweigh the incidents where they do by many orders of magnitude.[/p][/quote]"Cyclist propaganda" Now I've read everything. The_Fuzz22
  • Score: 2

2:55pm Fri 11 Apr 14

SAINTPAUL007 says...

elvisimo wrote:
Mary80 wrote:
Brite Spark wrote:
I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).
So damaging her car is somehow justified? Sorry but if it was my car i'd send you the bill ASAP
read his comment. she drove into him...
She didn't drive into him, she moved into the cycle lane and he went and kicked her car as he passed w......ker
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brite Spark[/bold] wrote: I have a 20 mile round trip commute on my bike to work. I have at least one near death experience every day, sometimes it's my fault (usually because I don't want to slow down and lose momentum, but I wouldn't go through a red light). 80 per cent of he time it's the car drivers fault as it was on the way home in my hi viz yesterday with lights on even though it was well before sunset with clear skies, I was doing about 15 mph in a cycle lane when a woman who had stopped because someone was parking on the right hand side of the single lane one way system suddenly veered around that car and into my cycle lane right in front of me. She had just driven past me but had forgotten immediately that I was there, and didn't check her mirrors before conducting the crazy manouvre. I had 'nowhere to go' with a high kerb to my left, she has a big size 10 dent in her bodywork now. More spacial awareness please car drivers (like I have when I'm driving my own car).[/p][/quote]So damaging her car is somehow justified? Sorry but if it was my car i'd send you the bill ASAP[/p][/quote]read his comment. she drove into him...[/p][/quote]She didn't drive into him, she moved into the cycle lane and he went and kicked her car as he passed w......ker SAINTPAUL007
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree