Cyclist films bad road behaviour.

Story in a national paper about a guy who puts up footage of bad road
behaviour on his website:

http://qurl.com/lvwpz

--
Simon Mason

wrote in message
...
Story in a national paper about a guy who puts up footage of bad road
behaviour on his website:

http://qurl.com/lvwpz

And Ian Jackson's set of amusing videos.

http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~ijackson/bikecams/

On 13 Jan, 09:57, " wrote:
Story in a national paper about a guy who puts up footage of bad road
behaviour on his website:

http://qurl.com/lvwpz


Cue threats of necklacing "just like what we do to speedcameras" from
the provisional wing of the motorfascists.

"Squashme" wrote in message
...
On 13 Jan, 09:57, " wrote:
Story in a national paper about a guy who puts up footage of bad road
behaviour on his website:

http://qurl.com/lvwpz


Cue threats of necklacing "just like what we do to speedcameras" from
the provisional wing of the motorfascists.

I'm a motorfascist and I support what he is doing. Note that he is also a
motorfascist as well as a cyclefascist.

wrote:
Story in a national paper about a guy who puts up footage of bad road
behaviour on his website:

http://qurl.com/lvwpz

If someone tried to film the bad behavior of cyclists he would run out of
film on day one.


--
Dave - the small piece of 14th century armour used to protect the armpit.

On 13 Jan, 10:26, Squashme wrote:
On 13 Jan, 09:57, " wrote:

Story in a national paper about a guy who puts up footage of bad road
behaviour on his website:

http://qurl.com/lvwpz

Nice to see the "road tax" argument just popped up in the "comments"
bit.
Surprised it took the best part of the whole day to finally kick in.
The world is on an even keel once again!
--
Simon Mason

On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:26:46 GMT someone who may be "The Medway
Handyman" wrote this:-

If someone tried to film the bad behavior of cyclists he would run out of
film on day one.

From time to time I have challenged someone to come with me to the
junction of Princes Street and North bridge in Edinburgh where we
will count the numbers of motorists and cyclists who ignore the red
lights. Nobody has taken me up on the offer yet, so they can't be
very sure of their assertions when challenged.

At the moment this challenge would be affected by the tram works,
but when they are finished I will resume making the challenge
occasionally.




--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000...#pt3-pb3-l1g54

David Hansen wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:26:46 GMT someone who may be "The Medway
Handyman" wrote this:-

If someone tried to film the bad behavior of cyclists he would run out of
film on day one.

From time to time I have challenged someone to come with me to the
junction of Princes Street and North bridge in Edinburgh where we
will count the numbers of motorists and cyclists who ignore the red
lights. Nobody has taken me up on the offer yet, so they can't be
very sure of their assertions when challenged.

At the moment this challenge would be affected by the tram works,
but when they are finished I will resume making the challenge
occasionally.

I've been there many times David, although I haven't had the pleasure of
meeting you there yet (AFAIK). ;-)

The problem though is not in the location or the count, but in what
should be counted. There is a huge difference between not stopping
within a moment or two of the lights changing* and arriving at a set of
red lights, possibly after passing already stopped traffic, with traffic
already crossing another way on green, then taking your chance and
jumping them.

The definition of RLJing to use for your count should exclude the former
and include the latter. You cannot seriously believe that, although
both actions are technically illegal, that the latter type is directly
comparable with the former type.

* Especially as it is clearly understood that no-one will have a green
light for those few moments.

--
Matt B

On 14 Jan, 10:17, Matt B wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:26:46 GMT someone who may be "The Medway
Handyman" wrote this:-

If someone tried to film the bad behavior of cyclists he would run out of
film on day one.

From time to time I have challenged someone to come with me to the
junction of Princes Street and North bridge in Edinburgh where we
will count the numbers of motorists and cyclists who ignore the red
lights. Nobody has taken me up on the offer yet, so they can't be
very sure of their assertions when challenged.

At the moment this challenge would be affected by the tram works,
but when they are finished I will resume making the challenge
occasionally.

I've been there many times David, although I haven't had the pleasure of
meeting you there yet (AFAIK). ;-)

The problem though is not in the location or the count, but in what
should be counted. *There is a huge difference between not stopping
within a moment or two of the lights changing* and arriving at a set of
red lights, possibly after passing already stopped traffic, with traffic
already crossing another way on green, then taking your chance and
jumping them.

The definition of RLJing to use for your count should exclude the former
and include the latter. *You cannot seriously believe that, although
both actions are technically illegal, that the latter type is directly
comparable with the former type.

* Especially as it is clearly understood that no-one will have a green
light for those few moments.

--
Matt B

There are various reasons for no-one having a green light for a few
moments, and jumping red lights thinking that it won't really matter
can seriously hamper cars that have pulled onto a junction, eg to turn
right across oncoming traffic. If they get no "break" when all lights
are on red, they can become stranded on the junction. I have seen
this happen in areas of high traffic density, where drivers tend to be
more aggressive in getting away at green lights as quickly as
possible, and "extend" the gree - amber-red sequence as long as
possible before deciding they really should stop. I see regular
examples of this on the North Circular between Hendon and Golders
Green.

Colin

wrote:
On 14 Jan, 10:17, Matt B wrote:
David Hansen wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jan 2010 18:26:46 GMT someone who may be "The Medway
Handyman" wrote this:-
If someone tried to film the bad behavior of cyclists he would run out of
film on day one.
From time to time I have challenged someone to come with me to the
junction of Princes Street and North bridge in Edinburgh where we
will count the numbers of motorists and cyclists who ignore the red
lights. Nobody has taken me up on the offer yet, so they can't be
very sure of their assertions when challenged.
At the moment this challenge would be affected by the tram works,
but when they are finished I will resume making the challenge
occasionally.
I've been there many times David, although I haven't had the pleasure of
meeting you there yet (AFAIK). ;-)

The problem though is not in the location or the count, but in what
should be counted. There is a huge difference between not stopping
within a moment or two of the lights changing* and arriving at a set of
red lights, possibly after passing already stopped traffic, with traffic
already crossing another way on green, then taking your chance and
jumping them.

The definition of RLJing to use for your count should exclude the former
and include the latter. You cannot seriously believe that, although
both actions are technically illegal, that the latter type is directly
comparable with the former type.

* Especially as it is clearly understood that no-one will have a green
light for those few moments.

There are various reasons for no-one having a green light for a few
moments, and jumping red lights thinking that it won't really matter
can seriously hamper cars that have pulled onto a junction, eg to turn
right across oncoming traffic. ...

I absolutely agree, it is rude and anti-social. But the point I was
making is that it is not directly compatible with the other type of
RLJing, which I believe to be the type that cyclists are more often
criticised for doing.

By all means do counts of both kinds, but one shouldn't attempt to
suggest that they are directly comparable.

--
Matt B