-
It seems to me that a lot of people are loosing perspective of what's going on here and a few are becoming contraries.
The vast majority of the people in the country learn to ride a bike at the age of only a few years because it is an easy process. We learn to drive, under instruction, and must pass a fairly rigorous testing to comply with law to be allowed to drive a car on these roads. I think we can agree that cycling is a far easier skill to learn than to drive.
If that is the case then it is the USE of the road by cyclists which is the problem being argued here. In which case I am not sure why training would be so useful when you consider (not a checked fact) that approx. 80% of London's cyclists are drivers as well, meaning the vast majority are already versed to the use of roads to at least the same level as the drivers of the cars with which they share the road.
Now I am a driver and a cyclist and I DO jump red lights on occasion. I say this not to annoy but to explain that I do this only when I consider it to be safe and is done without causing concern to drivers. When cycling around London I see others jump red lights and on almost all occasions (99.9%) I'd say it's done without causing concern to drivers as people don't jump reds and then close their eyes and pray they don't get hit.
Unlike drivers cyclists ARE aware of their vulnerability, whereas as a driver (and I vouch for this) I am not at all concerned with my vulnerability, although I personally am concerned about my car getting scratched or damaged.
I think drivers are more concerned with the speed at which cyclists move through traffic. The fact that with no warning a bike can fly past their window and give them a little scare. The idea that we move from lane to lane and pass vehicles very close by.
However this spiel about a granny dodging a pothole or the suchlike is convoluted rubbish. A driver (lets all go to the calling out bad cyclists thread) should not overtake a cyclist if there is any danger. A driver should look ahead of the cyclist to asses the obstacles they will encounter and react accordingly the way they do with other cars.
Beyond this I cannot think of any reason why every cyclist should have training to cycle on the roads. I haven't had any myself but I understand that the majority of the training is defensive-centric. Holding the road, positioning to hold future territory, etc, etc. Does this man not realise that if everybody was to follow the letter of the cycle training that his cabs would never be able to overtake a cyclist. This granny moving to avoid a pothole would never have had to move as she would have been in the centre of the lane already and this suggested overtake would never have been attempted in the first place?
Anyway, it appears that the majority of this anti-cyclist hype is based around the RLJing. As cyclists don't want to die and a fight with a car through a red light is not something a cyclist would do then the only conceivable reason for drivers anger regards RLJing is a deflected anger and jealousy that they must sit and wait while a cyclist can freely continue with very little chance of recompense.
Whatever, any time you find yourself 'understanding' his point of view or feeling any sort of sympathy you should re-read the original piece from the AL Spring magazine and realise that the words he wrote have the very real ability to be putting YOUR LIFE IN DANGER next time your on the road. Even if the piece is retracted you must remember this:
That instance when an AL car driver of less than reputable persuasion is intending to overtake you and something happens; be it a move to avoid a pothole, a forgotten signal, a chain snap, anything, that driver will in that instance have a perceived allowance to take the risk which puts you in danger because of what he read. Even if he doesn't consciously want to cause you harm that snap, subconscious second will not necessarily lead to the same decision as it would have before.
-
This^
-
Fuck it, I'm outta the bus lanes anyway
-
It seems to me that a lot of people are loosing perspective of what's going on here and a few are becoming contraries.
The vast majority of the people in the country learn to ride a bike at the age of only a few years because it is an easy process. We learn to drive, under instruction, and must pass a fairly rigorous testing to comply with law to be allowed to drive a car on these roads. I think we can agree that cycling is a far easier skill to learn than to drive.
If that is the case then it is the USE of the road by cyclists which is the problem being argued here. In which case I am not sure why training would be so useful when you consider (not a checked fact) that approx. 80% of London's cyclists are drivers as well, meaning the vast majority are already versed to the use of roads to at least the same level as the drivers of the cars with which they share the road.
Now I am a driver and a cyclist and I DO jump red lights on occasion. I say this not to annoy but to explain that I do this only when I consider it to be safe and is done without causing concern to drivers. When cycling around London I see others jump red lights and on almost all occasions (99.9%) I'd say it's done without causing concern to drivers as people don't jump reds and then close their eyes and pray they don't get hit.
Unlike drivers cyclists ARE aware of their vulnerability, whereas as a driver (and I vouch for this) I am not at all concerned with my vulnerability, although I personally am concerned about my car getting scratched or damaged.
I think drivers are more concerned with the speed at which cyclists move through traffic. The fact that with no warning a bike can fly past their window and give them a little scare. The idea that we move from lane to lane and pass vehicles very close by.
However this spiel about a granny dodging a pothole or the suchlike is convoluted rubbish. A driver (lets all go to the calling out bad cyclists thread) should not overtake a cyclist if there is any danger. A driver should look ahead of the cyclist to asses the obstacles they will encounter and react accordingly the way they do with other cars.
Beyond this I cannot think of any reason why every cyclist should have training to cycle on the roads. I haven't had any myself but I understand that the majority of the training is defensive-centric. Holding the road, positioning to hold future territory, etc, etc. Does this man not realise that if everybody was to follow the letter of the cycle training that his cabs would never be able to overtake a cyclist. This granny moving to avoid a pothole would never have had to move as she would have been in the centre of the lane already and this suggested overtake would never have been attempted in the first place?
Anyway, it appears that the majority of this anti-cyclist hype is based around the RLJing. As cyclists don't want to die and a fight with a car through a red light is not something a cyclist would do then the only conceivable reason for drivers anger regards RLJing is a deflected anger and jealousy that they must sit and wait while a cyclist can freely continue with very little chance of recompense.
Whatever, any time you find yourself 'understanding' his point of view or feeling any sort of sympathy you should re-read the original piece from the AL Spring magazine and realise that the words he wrote have the very real ability to be putting YOUR LIFE IN DANGER next time your on the road. Even if the piece is retracted you must remember this:
That instance when an AL car driver of less than reputable persuasion is intending to overtake you and something happens; be it a move to avoid a pothole, a forgotten signal, a chain snap, anything, that driver will in that instance have a perceived allowance to take the risk which puts you in danger because of what he read. Even if he doesn't consciously want to cause you harm that snap, subconscious second will not necessarily lead to the same decision as it would have before.
tl;dr
but fuck me, i never knew minky could actually type more than 2 or 3 words at a time
chapeau - one monkey with enough time at a keyboard and the above can materialise
-
Drivers who shouldn't be in the bus lane in the first place...
I just think a mass 'Go Slow In Primary' response is on really dodgy ground. I'm not sure it's ever a good idea to deliberately ride badly.
There is already a belief that cyclists ride 'in the middle of the road' and slowly because they're self-righteous bumholes (rather than because they're trying to survive the journey to work). Let's not fuel that misconception.
-
That instance when an AL car driver of less than reputable persuasion is intending to overtake you and something happens; be it a move to avoid a pothole, a forgotten signal, a chain snap, anything, that driver will in that instance have a perceived allowance to take the risk which puts you in danger because of what he read. Even if he doesn't consciously want to cause you harm that snap, subconscious second will not necessarily lead to the same decision as it would have before.
A great point well made and relevant to all drivers many of who take liberties with a riders safety because they either don't see that passing close is risky or wish to intimidate or are inpatient believing the slower rider is in the way. Many cyclists even on this thread like the above post who says 'go slow in primary is cycling badly.
And a lot of this is because so deep down poople who choose to move around in cars a always given deference and even slowing them down a little to minimise risk is seen as wrong. We let them kill people and alow them to if they say they weren't looking. And as posters here have demonstrated this status quo is so ingrained that people on bikes and on foot accept this mad situation
-
My company has an ethics and lawful compliance policy relating to its suppliers and procurement activities. I'm going to make enquiries on Monday as to whether or not we hold an account with Addison Lee and if so I won't be asking for an immediate suspension of the contract. That would be too easy, especially as I work in the Quality and Assurance Team. I'll make a very strong recommendation that we conduct an urgent supplier audit first.
-
All he's doing is cleverly externalising his responsibility for road safety onto cyclists.
He's made several statements and taken a couple of actions this past week that very clearly show that Addison Lee do not respect the laws of the land, and as these laws relate to other road users that John Griffin as owner of Addison Lee does not respect other road users.
Ignoring laws that have been on the books for the longest time, such as the cyclists right to wobble, and that SMIDSY is to drive without due care and attention... is reckless and irresponsible.
Do not allow yourself to get caught up in his deflection plan. There isn't a cyclist amongst us that wouldn't argue for more training and funds for training, but the issue is a minicab company led by a man who has instructed his drivers to ignore road laws, and by doing so put cyclists at increased risk.
Don't let this fool take your eyes off the real issue.
Until he makes a statement in which he commits Addison Lee to be a paragon of road safety, fully respecting all laws of the road and the rights of other road users to use the road... then Addison Lee should feel the effect of a full boycott by cyclists and our employers.
It has got to be the case that no company can knowingly use Addison Lee, as they would be allowing a contracted company to flaunt laws in their name (to move an employee from A to B).
Simply put: Fuck off John Griffin... tell us how you're going to respect all road laws and road users or STFU and feel our boycott.
There is always space for a reasoned debate on cycle training, but the issue here is the reckless actions of a minicab company.
-
UK Government E Petition:
Got to be done:
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/33116 -
I'll just leave this here
An improvement on the last suit, but still terrible. And no, we don't care what your watch is - you are not a footballer.
Gary Glitter pretty much ruined any of the appeal that joining a gang might ever have had really.
shudders
I vote Clive for Mayor.
I don't, he'd start tagging everything
He'd just demand tags for the football thread.
I think we should get Dignitas in on this, too.
Fixed
Die-in.
What a fucking cretinous idea, jesus christ.
Exactly - how would you carry a cross on a bike? How many will the forum trailer fit?
-
I've started a boycott thread (which shouldn't get merged into this one), to focus the action to be taken.
http://www.lfgss.com/thread84280.html
That thread is sticky, this one isn't.
-
Until he makes a statement in which he commits Addison Lee to be a paragon of road safety, fully respecting all laws of the road and the rights of other road users to use the road... then Addison Lee should feel the effect of a full boycott by cyclists and our employers.
Simply put: Fuck off John Griffin... tell us how you're going to respect all road laws and road users or STFU and feel our boycott.
There is always space for a reasoned debate on cycle training, but the issue here is the reckless actions of a minicab company.
But there are two issues here: his drivers' use of bus lanes and his (and possibly by extension his drivers') attitude towards cyclists.
A boycott is a great idea as a way of getting him to rescind his edict about bus lanes. We should all support it.
A statement? He has already made a statement that his drivers are trained to respect cyclists. He can make another one but what will that achieve if he does not actually change his ill-informed views? And how easy would it be for him to ask if cyclists are going to "respect **all **road laws?" He doesn't appreciate the different consequences of drivers' and cyclists' behavior. We can perhaps force him to *say *the right thing. We should also hope that we can get him really to believe in the right thing. That is not letting him fool us. -
I just think a mass 'Go Slow In Primary' response is on really dodgy ground. I'm not sure it's ever a good idea to deliberately ride badly.
There is already a belief that cyclists ride 'in the middle of the road' and slowly because they're self-righteous bumholes (rather than because they're trying to survive the journey to work). Let's not fuel that misconception.
Who decides what 'slowly' is though? I ride in Primary in bus lanes because a) I avoid all the shit in the gutter, b) it gives leeway in both directions to avoid last-minute hazards (ie. pedestrians stepping out) c) it means I don't have to adjust my line much to overtake slower people hugging the kerb and d) it avoids encouraging legitimate lane users to overtake inappropriately. Relatively speaking I'm going quite fast but to a car wanting to sit on the 30mph limit, it's probably too slow. Added to that the fact that if I can see a light ahead is red I'll cruise up to save energy/brakes/etc.
-
Now I am a driver and a cyclist and I DO jump red lights on occasion. I say this not to annoy but to explain that I do this only when I consider it to be safe and is done without causing concern to drivers. When cycling around London I see others jump red lights and on almost all occasions (99.9%) I'd say it's done without causing concern to drivers as people don't jump reds and then close their eyes and pray they don't get hit.
Unlike drivers cyclists ARE aware of their vulnerability, whereas as a driver (and I vouch for this) I am not at all concerned with my vulnerability, although I personally am concerned about my car getting scratched or damaged.
I really don't see why cyclists have to jump red lights,I don't.
Is it just done because they can't be bothered to stop?
No wonder drivers hate us.
-
Hang on,our mate brought this up justifying his RLJing and telling me that 99.9% jump reds and all that bollox.I was just replying to it.
-
this c u next tuesday is only gonna care if it hits him in the pocket.
Ive never used them so dont know what details they take when making a booking but was thinking, book a cab for a specific time (ie to an airport) then call 5mins before to tell them I've read griffins deplorable comments and as as a result would no longer like to use their service and cancel my booking.
My initial idea was paintballing the windscreen of any parked add lee vehicles but it would entail stooping to his levels.
-
What is happening with this?
Im starting my first commute (soon) since last Tuesday,should I expect trouble?
pigfarmer
andyp
barmeybear
Not_Jackie_Chan
dancing james
miro_o
skydancer
The_Seldom_Killer
VeeVee
Velocio
markrjohnson
Titivulus
handtightenonly
Dramatic_Hammer
Test_Train
reulbg
jr123-
Post a reply
About
Addison Lee drivers told to defy bus lane law (and to just say SMIDSY)
Posted by
All taxi drivers are white middle aged and fat, surviving on bacon sandwiches and copies of the mail.