Crackdown on drivers ignoring no entry signs.

On 30-Jul-2011, "Simon Mason" wrote:

Local drivers are putting walkers and cyclists in danger by ignoring a no
entry sign and will face a crackdown.

QUOTE:
Humberside Police officers are stepping up a campaign to safeguard people
walking and cycling along Wintringham Road, Grimsby. The stretch under
Peaks
Parkway is restricted to one-way traffic and several "No Entry" signs
alert
drivers at the Hainton Avenue end. But some motorists are ignoring the
rules - and the police are determined to crack down on the problem.
The force's casualty reduction officer, PC Barry Gardner, said: "It is an
offence to drive down past the 'No Entry' signs because the potential for
a
collision is high.

"There is a dip in the road and a motorist might not see a child or
someone
on a cycle. There is a clear conflict between someone taking a shortcut
westbound on Wintringham Road and a pedestrian or cyclist.

"There will be police enforcement in this area very soon and now anyone
reading this is in no doubt. If you still choose to break the law, then on

your head be it."

PC Gardner said those who take the illegal shortcut often do so at high
speed so they do not get caught but he warned that officers will soon be
in
the area to catch anyone taking that risk."

PC Gardner said those sort of instances prove the need to clamp down on
anyone taking the shortcut. Initial monitoring of the area showed some
drivers speeding at nearly 50mph along Wintringham Road.

http://www.thisisgrimsby.co.uk/Polic...ail/story.html

By 'crackdown' I assume you mean the usual slap-on-the-wrist from a
car-centric authority and justice system where motorists judge each other
and are naturally prejudiced against cyclists?

Doug.

"Doug" wrote in message
...

PC Gardner said those sort of instances prove the need to clamp down on
anyone taking the shortcut. Initial monitoring of the area showed some
drivers speeding at nearly 50mph along Wintringham Road.

http://www.thisisgrimsby.co.uk/Polic...ail/story.html

By 'crackdown' I assume you mean the usual slap-on-the-wrist from a
car-centric authority and justice system where motorists judge each other
and are naturally prejudiced against cyclists?

According to the story, drivers will get 3 points on top of the fine, so
serial law breakers will eventually get banned from the roads.

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

"Doug" wrote in message
...

By 'crackdown' I assume you mean the usual slap-on-the-wrist from a
car-centric authority and justice system where motorists judge each other
and are naturally prejudiced against cyclists?

There must be a lot of law breaking drivers in Grimsby.

QUOTE:
"A LOLLIPOP man has resigned in protest against "dangerous" motorists who
refuse to stop for him and the school children he is trying to protect.
Yesterday, Dave Bunce, 65, hung up his fluorescents for the final time after
his frustration at motorists speeding past his stop sign became too much to
bear – an offence fineable of up to £1,000. Mr Bunce claims cars have hit
his sign, double-decker buses have ignored him and motorists have verbally
abused him.

http://www.thisisgrimsby.co.uk/Lolli...ail/story.html


--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

On 30/07/2011 08:47, Doug wrote:
On 30-Jul-2011, "Simon Mason" wrote:

Local drivers are putting walkers and cyclists in danger by ignoring a no
entry sign and will face a crackdown.

I just hope that cyclists who ignore the sign will also be fined.

"Nuxx Bar" wrote in message
...
On 30/07/2011 08:47, Doug wrote:
On 30-Jul-2011, "Simon Mason" wrote:

Local drivers are putting walkers and cyclists in danger by ignoring a
no
entry sign and will face a crackdown.

I just hope that cyclists who ignore the sign will also be fined.

You obviously did not see the exemption for cyclists. It is more visible
here.

http://qurl.com/jkmqk

--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

On Sat, 30 Jul 2011 15:45:43 +0100, "Simon Mason"
wrote:


"Nuxx Bar" wrote in message
...
On 30/07/2011 08:47, Doug wrote:
On 30-Jul-2011, "Simon Mason" wrote:

Local drivers are putting walkers and cyclists in danger by ignoring a
no
entry sign and will face a crackdown.

I just hope that cyclists who ignore the sign will also be fined.

You obviously did not see the exemption for cyclists. It is more visible
here.

http://qurl.com/jkmqk


Yes - but you cannot ride your push-bike down there as cycle lanes are not be
used by real cyclists

--
Simple Simon Mason - who cycles at 25mph in 20mph limits just because the limits do not apply to cyclists.
This includes exceeding the speed limit past three schools. A total disregard for the well-being of vulnerable road users.
The actions of a true psycholist.

On 30/07/2011 15:45, Simon Mason wrote:

"Nuxx Bar" wrote in message
...
On 30/07/2011 08:47, Doug wrote:
On 30-Jul-2011, "Simon Mason" wrote:

Local drivers are putting walkers and cyclists in danger by ignoring
a no
entry sign and will face a crackdown.

I just hope that cyclists who ignore the sign will also be fined.

You obviously did not see the exemption for cyclists. It is more visible
here.

http://qurl.com/jkmqk

There's no exemption to the restriction itself, there's merely an
alternative route without a "no entry" sign which cyclists can take.
I'm sure you'd agree with me that cyclists who still go through the "no
entry" bit itself, because they can't be bothered to use the narrow
entrance (or they're obstructive psycholists who refuse to use cycle
lanes on "principle"), should be fined, because that's "the law". Yes?

I note that if you go to the other side of the bridge (
http://tinyurl.com/42rdrbh ), it becomes apparent that the two-way bit
(which in theory is actually two-way for all traffic...cars are only
breaking the law when they go through the "no entry" sign itself) only
lasts until there, and then the cycle lane ends and it becomes one-way
towards the bridge. How many cyclists do you think actually bother to
get off and push at that point? It seems to me that the "exemption"
above is more-or-less encouraging them to break the law, otherwise there
doesn't seem much point in having it. Regardless, I'm sure that once
again, you'd be keen to see cyclists being fined if they do carry on
cycling against the one-way restriction...it's "the law" after all!

(I like the grade-separated road above the bridge BTW (not often that
you see a grade-separated single carriageway...did it perhaps use to be
a railway?), except it's a shame about the silly hatching and the 30mph
limit on a primary route without pedestrians...unfortunately such
anti-motorist nonsense is par for the course in this country now. Every
time there's a clearly stupid 30mph limit like that, proper 30mph limits
become less respected. You'd think that was obvious to anyone who had
even the slightest clue about human nature, but thereagain, car-haters
don't really consider motorists to be valid human beings at all, at
least while they're driving, so maybe that's the explanation.

You'd think that anyone who really cared about safety would want to
encourage drivers to use roads like that in preference to the
alternatives by not plastering petty, spiteful restrictions all over
them. The fact that they do is just another indication that these
"safety" measures are actually about discouraging driving altogether,
even on segregated routes where vulnerable road users are unlikely to
be...why not just live and let live, and leave motorists alone on those
roads?)

On 30/07/2011 15:45, Simon Mason wrote:

"Nuxx Bar" wrote in message
...
On 30/07/2011 08:47, Doug wrote:
On 30-Jul-2011, "Simon Mason" wrote:

Local drivers are putting walkers and cyclists in danger by ignoring a no
entry sign and will face a crackdown.

I just hope that cyclists who ignore the sign will also be fined.

You obviously did not see the exemption for cyclists. It is more visible here.

http://qurl.com/jkmqk

That is not an exemption for anybody. There is a separate route for cyclists.
Passing between the No Entry signs on a bike is an offence.

Not that the remarks made by those wanting wider enforcement of "minor"
non-compliance with traffic signage should be interpreted as pertaining only
to that street.

There is massive breach of one-way traffic working by cyclists every day. I
understand that even a Guardian journalist was penalised for cycling along
the footway (the wrong way) in order to "avoid" a one-way street - as though
cycling on the footway was the answer.

HTH

On 30/07/2011 21:12, Phil W Lee wrote:
Nuxx Bar considered Sat, 30 Jul 2011 15:18:26
+0100 the perfect time to write:

On 30/07/2011 08:47, Doug wrote:
On 30-Jul-2011, "Simon Mason" wrote:

Local drivers are putting walkers and cyclists in danger by ignoring a no
entry sign and will face a crackdown.

I just hope that cyclists who ignore the sign will also be fined.

What for?

Breaking the law.

There is an exemption for them.

See other posts: there is no exemption for the "no entry" signs
themselves, there just happens to be another route which cyclists can
use instead.

Do you really think it is a good idea for police to waste their and
the courts time by issuing tickets that will be over-ruled by the
courts?

No. But if cyclists go through the "no entry" signs themselves (e.g.
because they refuse to use cycle lanes on "principle") then they should
be fined, and that fine will be upheld. I'm sure you agree that such
fines are necessary since "the law is the law".

On 30/07/2011 21:12, Phil W Lee wrote:
Nuxx considered Sat, 30 Jul 2011 15:18:26
+0100 the perfect time to write:

On 30/07/2011 08:47, Doug wrote:
On 30-Jul-2011, "Simon wrote:

Local drivers are putting walkers and cyclists in danger by ignoring a no
entry sign and will face a crackdown.

I just hope that cyclists who ignore the sign will also be fined.

What for?
There is an exemption for them.

There isn't.

In that location, "No Entry" means "No Entry" for everyone.

Do you really think it is a good idea for police to waste their and
the courts time by issuing tickets that will be over-ruled by the
courts?

Why would that happen?