-
Transport for London denies its roads are killing people.
TfL obviously didn't say this, but if they had done, they would have been right--their streets are indeed not killing people. However, there's no doubt that poor street design contributes to the likelihood of serious and fatal crashes, and that TfL is not doing a good job of tackling proper infrastructure projects that would change things for the better more quickly.
That sort of tabloid-style formulation doesn't help anyone.
-
I disagree, Oliver, if a poor street design increases the likelihood of a incident, there will be an inevitability of the accumulative effect of incidents which will - as luck would have it - lead to a fatality. There are no "accidents" after all.
You say that the post by Cyclists in the City doesn't help anyone, but I'd disagree - it's helping people to find a voice on a subject about which they rightly feel angry, and that anger is finding ways to manifest itself and push for change. If that's not a good thing I don't know what is.
Aaaaanyway... getting way off topic here. The important thing is that as many people as possible are there on Wednesday. And on that note, further to David's email this morning, just to clarify that the protest is from 5.45PM, soutside of Blackfriars Bridge on WEDNESDAY 12th OCTOBER (not Monday)
-
I disagree, Oliver, if a poor street design increases the likelihood of a incident, there will be an inevitability of the accumulative effect of incidents which will - as luck would have it - lead to a fatality. There are no "accidents" after all.
Roads/streets don't kill people. Have you ever been attacked by one? People's actions kill people, either themselves or others. A road might rise up during an earthquake, but it would be the earthquake killing people, not the road. If there are serious potholes, it's not the potholes that kill a cyclist who crashes into them and breaks his neck, as they are passive. At best, it's the actions of the person who had the responsibility for maintaining the road and didn't do it. There is no 'inevitability' about the effects of poor street design, just a higher likelihood of an incident. They are contributing factors, but not primary (active) causes. My point was really just about the fact that it's straightforwardly false that 'roads kill people' or that there are 'dangerous roads', as all that deflects people's responsibility away from them. It's just shrill and inaccurate.
There are indeed no 'accidents' in the sense that everything is fully caused. However, there are plenty of 'accidents' in the sense that we sometimes lose control and things happen that we didn't intend, with adverse consequences. If I drop the anvil I'm carrying on my foot, then that's an accident. Don't confuse this with the very important concern not to assume automatically that a road traffic collision is an 'accident'. Some are, the majority aren't, so that we shouldn't automatically assume that they are. If a lorry's brakes fail catastrophically and it plunges down a ravine, killing the driver, that's an accident. Its brakes might have been verified just the week before, but it would be an accidental outcome over which the driver would have had no control. Obviously, again there would be a chain of responsibility via the person who should have checked the brakes, etc.
You say that the post by Cyclists in the City doesn't help anyone, but I'd disagree - it's helping people to find a voice on a subject about which they rightly feel angry, and that anger is finding ways to manifest itself and push for change. If that's not a good thing I don't know what is.
I mainly objected to the headline and can't remember the rest of the post. I think Danny has very good journalistic skills. One curious thing that you'll find with a little more experience about campaigning for change is that anger doesn't actually achieve a great deal of lasting change. It's mostly hard work and good communication that achieves change. By all means, use your anger to get into something, but what makes a real difference in the end is that which can be sustained, i.e. a reasonable cause. Anger very rarely can be (one issue this week, another issue the next, as after all we have to sell papers), and if it is, then that is a cause for worry. -
Clive, there are exceptions to every rule and some instances in which a road's anger is entirely justified. ;)
-
tl;dr
total liability;damaged rectum?
-
Oliver, I know you mean well but somehow you have a way sometimes of really rubbing me up the wrong way with the way you write. I don't think you mean to, but jeez..
You wrote:
"One curious thing that you'll find with a little more experience about campaigning for change.."
..which is possibly the most patronising way I've been spoken to since, hmm, I was on a pride march aged 14. (that's sixteen years ago)Aaaaanyway(!!!) back to the point... great to see that Val Shawcross and Jenny Jones are going to be there next Wednesday. Hopefully John Biggs as well. It would be great if we could get politicians of all colours there to show that it really is an issue that Londoners of all backgrounds care about. Fingers crossed! I'm sure a few email to our AMs by constituents wouldn't hurt if anyone has the time...?
-
Oliver, I know you mean well but somehow you have a way sometimes of really rubbing me up the wrong way with the way you write. I don't think you mean to, but jeez..
You wrote:
"One curious thing that you'll find with a little more experience about campaigning for change.."
..which is possibly the most patronising way I've been spoken to since, hmm, I was on a pride march aged 14. (that's sixteen years ago)I apologise for the formulation. It wasn't meant to be patronising. My points stand, though. I was really just picking them up because they're among those commonly-shared falsehoods that you hear all the time from people think who have little experience of traffic and street design. I was probably picked up on most of them when I first started out cycle campaigning, all of twelve years ago. :)
-
No humbrage taken, Oliver. Perhaps I was having a particularly shitty day on Friday and was biting too easily anyway.
The gears are really ramping up now towards the demo on Wednesday - indeed if all goes to plan it's all everyone is going to hear about over the next few days(!!)
Would be great to have a big LFGSS contingent there again, just like last time. (the demo starts at a pub, how much more persuading do you need?!) Is it time to start a list? Methinks perhaps it is!
- markbikeslondon
2... You?
- markbikeslondon
-
some great work from lcc here:
http://lcc.org.uk/pages/people-friendly-blackfriars
(and, oliver, i think both rational and emotional arguments have their place, at the right moments: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vRcgpX3OQPg/TpG9g7pMY9I/AAAAAAAAA3o/obuk3gjdi4U/s1600/Stop+de+kindermort1.png . though, i agree, if you shout too much, over time, people stop listening. anger should be used sparingly, but sometimes it's essential)
-
No humbrage taken, Oliver. Perhaps I was having a particularly shitty day on Friday and was biting too easily anyway.
The gears are really ramping up now towards the demo on Wednesday - indeed if all goes to plan it's all everyone is going to hear about over the next few days(!!)
Would be great to have a big LFGSS contingent there again, just like last time. (the demo starts at a pub, how much more persuading do you need?!) Is it time to start a list? Methinks perhaps it is!
- markbikeslondon
2... You?
I'm going to be marshalling see you there
- markbikeslondon
-
some great work from lcc here:
How cool are those graphics? They piss all over TfL's current plans and show the narrowminded limitation of their scope. I love positive campaigning, if this doesn't inspire you as to how our streets could be then I don't know what will!
-
Are there going to be more flyers to hand to people wanting to know whats going on? Last time people were asking me what was happening, and saying that they supported it, and who could they get in touch with to make a difference. I handed the one that I was given last time to a couple in the back of a taxi, who were really pleased, although the taxi driver was a bit miffed...
-
That's a really good idea. I'll ask the LCC peeps to bring more along. I think they are going to be flyering people on other Thames bridges as well tomorrow to drum up awareness for Wednesday.
-
How cool are those graphics? They piss all over TfL's current plans and show the narrowminded limitation of their scope. I love positive campaigning, if this doesn't inspire you as to how our streets could be then I don't know what will!
It's quite nice, though the street level pictures are hilariously poor :-)
But those animations:
Why don't they show cyclists wanting to turn right from the road out of the city?
Or cars turning left off the embankment when bikes are turning right?Everything looks wonderful if you edit out anything which may cause a problem.
-
Something showing the TFL proposals, and the LCC suggestion with a link to the LCC page, and details of how to contact assembly members might be good.
shrug just thinking off the top of my head here, but something people not involved can take away and discover the point of what you're doing and why is important, it moves you from a bunch of idiots holding up traffic for no reason, to a bunch of idiots holding up traffic for a reason. And people are more forgiving and interested when there is a reason, and they know about it.
-
Bunch of idiots, eh? Don't you think that's a bit of a dismissive – and possibly idiotic – comment to make?
Aspersions aside though, you're point is a good one. There must be flyers, banners and chants that actually let people know what's going on here. Otherwise it's a waste of time.
Blue Quinn, you're right about there being aspects of traffic flow that LCC haven't thought through properly. Perhaps if TfL, traffic and town planners had addressed the concerns of campaigners like LCC to begin with we'd have a better system. I think it demonstrates there are possibilities TfL haven't thought of or have chosen to ignore rather than puts forward a strict model they should switch to.
Anyway, I'll be there because I think it's important.
-
I was there last time, it was certainly the view of some of the peds and drivers that we were "bunch of idiots", once it had been explained why we were there, this view changed.
I'm not suggesting that this is in the least idiotic, and I'm certainly planning on being there, just that it's important to ensure that the public perception is that we're not just idiots. You have to face the fact that without any information getting to them, thats what we may appear to be.
-
inhumane cyclists ftw. personally i make a big effort to run over cats. and then leave them mewling pitifully in the road for the cars to take care of.
We just need to show that we're just people riding a bicycle, not a 'cyclist'.
a 'cyclist' is a dirty word nowadays, somehow doesn't make you look humane.
Oliver Schick
markbikeslondon
cliveo
chameleon
Webof
MrDrem
bq
user14265
photoben
neu
edscoble
deleted-
Post a reply
About
TfL considering modifying cycle lane on Blackfriars Bridge
Posted by
@Seak
Cyclists in the City have just done an excellent little blog post which to me sort of captures everything I feel about Blackfriars and all the other dangerous roads around London;
http://cyclelondoncity.blogspot.com/2011/10/transport-for-london-denies-its-roads.html
It's just not acceptable that we're supposed to 'man up' and ride around multi-lane gyratories and accept every death of a cyclist or pedestrian as necessary collateral damage. I'll be there on the 12th October!