meshuga

To all those wanting ID plates, tax, insurance etc for cyclists, it'll never happen. All these things will reduce the uptake of cycling. In so doing so via the "safety in numbers" effect the risks to all road users will increase. Your proposals will cost lives.

More on safety in numbers here http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaign/safety-in-numbers

An ID plate won't make bad riders any better. Just like it doesn't stop bad motorists driving dangerously. It didn't stop the bell end who overtook into oncoming traffic this morning me whilst I was in the middle of my lane with my arm out indicating right, only to take the same right turn and wait 100yards further on in a queue of traffic. It doesn't stop the people texting away whilst driving. You may claim I can report these people to the police more effectively. I can't see the police following up on any of these cases if I did.

---------- Post added 10-10-2014 at 18:06 ----------

Furthermore, PCCs are ridiculous. They were designed to let whinging Daily Mail readers elect some idiot to wag fingers at the police, thinking they have a say in the way the police do their daily business, but in reality they have been used by political parties to get politicians they have no use for elected in these roles to spout the odd bit of party political nonsense or just nonsense in general, to keep the Daily Mail readers happy and take a nice salary and expenses to go with it.

The Greater Manchester clown, Tony Lloyd, was a failed labour politico. On taking up his £100k pa role, the first thing he did was create the £65k pa position of Deputy PCC, and appointed his campaign manager. Apparently, this shameless little wheeze has been repeated all over the country. He then, without a hint of self-awareness, proposed cutting police salaries by £4k to save money.

It would help if Katy Bourne had two brain cells to rub together. Reading this interview leaves little to be desired

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2014/oct/09/police-commissioner-proposes-id-for-cyclists-but-cant-explain-why-or-how

She has no better idea as to how such an idea is to be implemented than some of the wholly impractical ideas on this thread!

Pedestrians are a menace!!!!

If they paid pavement tax, had a number plate on and had insurance, none of this would have happened!!!!! :rant:

You're wrong....

Yes, and this is not the first time that Dawny has shown that his/her understanding of the rules of the road is poor.

Lorries pay more road tax than you, so they have right of way and can barge you off the road.

http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/i-knocked-a-cyclist-off-his-bike-i-have-right-of-way-he-doesnt-even-pay-road-tax/

This story is a chilling reminder that hate-filled arguments about cyclists are first of all completely misguided and offensive, but secondly, potentially deadly. What a disturbing lack of care this woman showed towards human life, not only running the cyclist over but then bragging about it on Twitter. It's the same irrational hatred of cycling and cyclists that a number of posts on here show too.

This +1.

How long before ill-informed internet arguments about road use, tax and entitlement are used to justify ramming into children, "because they didn't pay road tax"? Disturbing. Some of the posters on here should be ashamed. Think people. Think.

I cycle to work every day and stop at every red. I see a lot of cyclists stopping too. The sooner the minority of cyclists that jump reds realise that it gives us all a bad name and opens us up to these sort of (frankly indefensible) internet rants, the better.

Just think, what will the anti-cyclist lobby be able to moan about then? The tax and insurance debate is a none starter for them, stop giving them the red light jumping fuel for the fire. The RLJ is the only thing we cannot defend.

Generally, the type of people who don't pick up their dog eggs are unapproachable on the subject. There's never going to be a time when you could have a rational conversation and sway their opinion on the matter.

There are the ones who just don't do it because they are filthy, and the ones who just won't do it because they think someone else should pick it up. They are too good to do it themselves.

People love dogs and dogs have to crap. People don't like to handle crap. Crap will be left behind. We will spread it around and make room for more crap. A never ending cycle of crap.

As I understand it, from personal experience, you can have a wood burning stove anywhere in Sheffield, but in smoke control areas (most of Sheffield) you must have a DEFRA approved stove and be burning fuel of the correct cross sectional area and moisture content (i.e logs that are well seasoned and not too big) that the manufacturer specifies. Your neighbour should be complying with these regulations to keep within the law.

I came here expecting to find a rant about breaking wind in crowded places...ahh well.

Tragic. RIP

Equally tragic are the usual idiotic comments after the article. What is wrong with people?

May I ask what you did last week when the tempretures hit 12-14 degress, did you change your tyres back or carry on driving on your dangerous, reduced grip tyres?

Which dangerous reduced grip tyres would those be?

I think you have an odd understanding of tyre compounds or physics. Winter tyres will always provide the same or more grip than summer tyres. They are a softer compound that stays pliable in cold temperatures. They are safe to use in a heat wave in the middle of summer. They wouldn't last more than few hundred miles but they will stop you just fine.

A few hundred quid on a set, lasts you several years, put them on beginning november, take them off in late march. It is ludicrous to see folk spending thousands on a car to then not consider how to drive it safely in the winter. I'm sure there is an old saying about horses and shoes, something about saving a few quid on shoes and you'll lose the entire horse. Seems a good analogy to me. Saw a brand new Jaguar going sideways down a hill today. Nice one.

---------- Post added 05-02-2013 at 23:54 ----------

I'm sure there is an old saying about horses and shoes, something about saving a few quid on shoes and you'll lose the entire horse. Seems a good analogy to me.

Here we go

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.

For want of a shoe the horse was lost.

For want of a horse the rider was lost.

For want of a rider the message was lost.

For want of a message the battle was lost.

For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.

And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

Not suggesting we'll lose the kingdom but if motorists would just spend an hour getting prepared pre-winter, the city need not be gridlocked.

Well worth it for the 2 days a year that you need them!

 

Alternativley you could drive carefully or not bother?

I've found a need for my winter tyres for about 10 days this winter so far, and they provide better grip in wet weather on many other days too. The working day has carried on as normal for me.

If everyone was responsible and made sure their car was suitably equipped before driving off this gridlock may be a thing of the past.

Alternatively you could get used to threads like this - motorists blaming someone else for the gridlock instead of thinking ahead.

If you are serious about winter commuting regularly a dynamo setup is probably the best way. A good shimano hub dynamo with good front and rear lights can be purchased and built into your existing wheel for about £170, thats parts and labour, especially if you source the parts from Germany.

May seem like a big outlay but the lights are always there when you need them and you'll never worry about flat batteries. Modern LED dynamo lamps are brght enough for dark unlit roads. If its your main method of getting to work in the winter the high initial price will be well worth it. I have used the same setup for 7 years and it is still going strong.

Great to see more cycling facilities in accessible areas, the majority of legal trails in the peak are a fair ride on an MTB without a car.

A note of relative caution though, the attraction to certain members of society the thought of potentially thousands of pounds worth of kit being ridden there, warrants some caution from SCC and the MTB fraternity. On Tuesday a man was mugged at knife point in broad daylight in Rother Valley park by three lads, one on a dirt bike. Took his bike worth over 2k and some other personal possessions.

Certainly not something you see out of the cities, and to put into perspective as well, not at present a common incident at all thank goodness. Remember there is safety in numbers, and certainly make sure your kit is insured away from the home. It's up to the owners/volunteers of the Parkwood track to decide whether CCTV may be some deterrent,

Links here

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/robbery-at-knife-point-on-trans-pennine-trail-rother-valley-country-park

and here

http://www.worksopguardian.co.uk/news/local-news/man-robbed-at-knife-point-near-rother-valley-country-park-1-4898840

I've never seen any around Sheffield and I'm a fairly keen forager. There are loads in the Lake District, can even give GPS coords if needed!

For just commuting and nothing more rough than riding around the derwent dams, and disused railway lines, stick to a road bike, not an MTB. It will make your commute far more enjoyable.

This thread from bike radar gives buying advice and recommendations for each budget

http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=40042&t=12577960

or choose something from this section

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/C-376962-hybrid-and-touring-bikes

@jrb123

Well said, you display more maturity than most of the judging, out-spoken adults on SF. If only some of the adults on here could put a point of view across so eloquently, you put many of them to shame.

It'll be interesting to note how many advocates of a higher speed limit are also horrified at the price of fuel. Driving more slowly is more fuel efficient. I'm surprised people can afford to drive much above 60mph these days! Perhaps the penny hasn't dropped yet?

I see no point in making reaching our carbon reduction targets even harder by allowing higher speeds on the motorway.

This is nothing to do with turning right though, the cycle lane is to the left and the car driver wishes to move left into a filter lane on the other side of the cycle lane.

I wasn't familiar with the road but I see now, yes in that case, if the road user has just passed the cyclist they should be able to remember the cyclist is there and not "left hook" them (if only this was the case every time!)

In congestion where cyclists are "filtering" up the cycle lane on the near side they have right of way, and road users on the main carriageway should check the mirrors or look over the shoulder before moving left. However I myself in these situations proceed with extreme caution as again I've seen many road users move without indicating.

A road user turning right across a single carriageway with a cycle lane on the near side should treat it as if they were turning across a dual carriageway. i.e. you check both lanes are clear before making the turn. Oncoming traffic has the right of way in both lanes but whether in a car or on a bicycle they should anticipate the right turning traffic having not seen them.

Definitely grouse drinks. Rainwater channels allowed the water to collect. However in dry weather the gamekeepers had to fill them up by carrying water to the drinks. They were numbered to make sure they didn't lose track of those they had done and those they hadn't.

You only have the choice if you can afford to buy these zero or low emission cars. Are we to think that everyone who needs a car actually has the good fortune to be able to afford these cars? And what about all the cars that are still perfectly usable, but have a VED charge to pay? Shall we just chuck these away, and get into debt to buy the zero VED car? Thats not a choice, that sounds like compulsary vehicle cleansing, when the motor car is not quite as bad as these green loonies would have us believe. Have a read of this link, and then you will see that if this is correct, VED is nothing more than a filthy dirty road tax. http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/cow-emissions-more-damaging-to-planet-than-cosub2sub-from-cars-427843.html

Come off it, a low or zero VED car is often a cheaper option when replacing a car. They tend to be low powered and cheap to insure. I haven't said you should scrap your existing car to get one, just that when we go through the process of replacing a vehicle we all have the choice to purchase one with low or zero VED. And we all have the choice to ride a bike, they are available on eBay from 99p.

As for the link, what are you getting at now? We also have the choice to eat less meat if you were really that bothered about co2 emissions.

All I want to get across is that when people complain that VED is a road tax, they have got a point. None of us like paying it as there is enough tax on fuel, and nobody is REALLY suggesting that motorists have any more rights than a cyclist

I still don't see how this affects whether a vehicle has right of way over the vehicle in front or not?

I will just point out that all of us have the choice of using a vehicle that is exempt from VED, or making our next purchase a zero or low VED car. The zero VED rate has been around for some years now, it's not exactly new. I made the choice to get a zero VED car four years ago when it was time to change from my old banger that was costing more to run, pay VED for, and maintain than buying something else.

I pay no VED on any of the vehicles I own, bikes or car (does this seem unfair to anyone, I still pay plenty of income and council tax?). I still have right of way (which is what this thread is about) over the vehicle that is behind me when using all of those vehicles. I always however will pull over when on my pushbike to allow the tram to pass when it is safe to do so

I don't get it when society (or some users of this forum) has to have a go at a group of people that are making intelligent and informed choices about reducing their tax burden via their choice of transport. If folks want to "complain that VED is a road tax" then they can go ahead, but if they haven't figured out ways of reducing that tax by now then more fool them. They should act on it and stop complaining, 'cos no one is going to act for them.

Oh my life!! You cycle guys are impossible! Here is my point AGAIN in two simple sentences;

 

You cannot drive a car on the highway in this country without paying VED.

You can ride a pushbike on the highway in this country without paying VED.

Correct. No problems with that observation. Did I miss the bit where someone stated otherwise? What does VED have to do with whether the tram has right of way over a vehicle that is in front of it? Do trams display a tax disc?

Until we have a level playing field and ALL people using the roads are judged equally, we will have resentment by those who feel the full force of the law while others can ignore it and are immune to the consequence.

I couldn't agree more

"[in 2010] there were over 2,057 fatal crashes but only 504 prosecutions for causing death by careless, dangerous driving or careless driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Only around a third of deaths which involved at least two vehicles or a pedestrian are dealt with by an appropriate charge. This means that around 1,000 drivers who were involved in the death of another road user were either not charged, or were only charged with a lesser offence."

Source http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopModules/Articles/ArticlesView.aspx?TabID=0&ItemID=642&mid=13641