Stop!

[gaz]

Some of us continually go round in circles.

That's because they've removed the traffic light controlled crossroads and replaced it with a roundabout .

[Mick F]

Some of us continually go round in circles.

I feel that I'm doing that all the time these days.

Yes!

Here's a little story:
Many yonks ago in Devonport Dockyard when I commuted by bike, the siren used to go off and all the traffic was brought to a standstill whilst the pedestrians could carry on to the bus stops. Hundreds of them! Out through Camel's Head Gate, St Leven's Gate, Granby Gate, and Albert Gate. Hundreds of them!

If I wasn't quick enough to get away, I would be caught in the "Stand Still".
Instead of cycling, I would have to walk with my bike.
No scooting, no sitting side-saddle, no freewheeling .......... just walking .......... and the MOD police would be watching.

My point about this anecdote is that we cyclists can't have it both ways.
We are either road vehicles and have to abide by the road traffic act ...................... or we are just pedestrians on wheels.

[Bicycler]

I was imagining a third way, where the law regarding bicycles accommodated their versatility. In reality we are neither pedestrians nor family hatchbacks

[thirdcrank]

How about a single poster - in the form of permanent signs - along the lines of the French road signs advising leaving 1.5 metres when overtaking a cyclist? Five feet is a rough imperial equivalent.

[reohn2]

:idea: How about a single poster - in the form of permanent signs - along the lines of the French road signs advising leaving 1.5 metres when overtaking a cyclist? Five feet is a rough imperial equivalent.

I've been thinking that all through this thread,it makes you wonder why not

[MartinC]

Some of us continually go round in circles.

A lot of stuff here is cyclical.

[kwackers]

My point about this anecdote is that we cyclists can't have it both ways.
We are either road vehicles and have to abide by the road traffic act ...................... or we are just pedestrians on wheels.

Really? I fail to see why that statement is true.

It's possible to legally change the definition depending on whether you're on a pavement or a road, it's also possible to include exceptions in the highway code for bicycles - something we already do.
The only thing that actually stops cyclists having it both ways is us. There's no law of nature/physics that prevents it.

[[XAP]Bob]

My point about this anecdote is that we cyclists can't have it both ways.
We are either road vehicles and have to abide by the road traffic act ...................... or we are just pedestrians on wheels.

Erm, except that some of the rules of the road only apply to MOTOR vehicles (like speed limits).

It's trivial to have different classes of vehicle subject to different rules.

[keyboardmonkey]

In the interest of balance...

Er, but both facing away from the actual traffic.

Rather you than me on this particular road:

Within a hundred yards or so (East Yorkshire)

[LollyKat]

In the interest of balance...

Er, but both facing away from the actual traffic.

Are these set up on bus shelters? If so there may be a regulation / recommendation that they leave the side facing the direction of travel clear, so that bus drivers can see if anyone is waiting there.

[MikeF]

............ some cyclists see themselves as informal road users, or pedestrians on wheels.

Oh but they are, aren't they? Haven't you seen all the new ideas about shared space? Pedestrians are usually shown with cyclists. And what about all the shared pavements? It's not just some cyclists who see themselves as pedestrians on wheels.

[gaz]

:idea: How about a single poster - in the form of permanent signs - along the lines of the French road signs advising leaving 1.5 metres when overtaking a cyclist? Five feet is a rough imperial equivalent.

Fantastic idea. Now where have I seen one of those before? Here.

I still don't know if this actually adorns some street in Hastings (or elsewhere) or if it was simply put together in photoshop .

[keyboardmonkey]

In the interest of balance...

Er, but both facing away from the actual traffic.

Are these set up on bus shelters? If so there may be a regulation / recommendation that they leave the side facing the direction of travel clear, so that bus drivers can see if anyone is waiting there.

Actually, as I took a photograph of the Junctions poster a chap from JCDecaux pulled in to the bus stop and replaced the poster inside the bus shelter with something else (I didn't notice what it was). We had a chuckle about the direction the Safety Tips posters were facing. He said that all six Think! posters had been used locally in the last week or so.

[danhopgood]

............ some cyclists see themselves as informal road users, or pedestrians on wheels.

Oh but they are, aren't they? Haven't you seen all the new ideas about shared space? Pedestrians are usually shown with cyclists. And what about all the shared pavements? It's not just some cyclists who see themselves as pedestrians on wheels.

But shared spaces are (or ought to be) designed as such - such that there's space for evasive manoeuvres by all parties. Cyclists going down a footpath at speed - where pedestrians expect and have a right to be the only traffic is not acceptable. Shared use footway / cycleways are often well below any sort of reasonable design standard though, due to cycle facilities being treated as an afterthought. THAT needs to be changed - by making sure cycling infrastructure is properly funded.

[blackbike]

Every one of these posters telling cyclists to obey red lights is a missed opportunity for an extra safety related poster aimed at the people who cause very nearly all the death, injury and destruction on our roads - drivers of motor vehicles.

This makes them a poor use of public money.