Police in London attack critical mass

On 8 Oct 2005 04:38:29 -0700, wrote:

I thing you make an important point here. Now the more I research
transportation issues the more radical I tend to become, but even I see
problems with certain confrontational behaviours. Thing is does the
actions of a few ultra-radicals warrant police intervention? I have
seen CM in London and it looked great and received a good response. I
think the real problem is that far too many drivers see the roads as
being exclusively 'theirs' and just can't cope with seeing cyclist
acting 'as if they owned the roads', even if this only happens just 12
times a year. Given this some 'confrontation' is probably inevitable
and from what I have read most of the really nasty 'confrontation' at
CM events comes from the users of motor vehicles...

Have you researched the claims of this organisation?

http://www.transport-watch.co.uk/

On Sat, Sniper8052 wrote:

The difference is that CM are doing something illegal

What, exactly?

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

On 8 Oct 2005 05:38:01 -0700, wrote:

Jim Ley wrote:

... tight overtaking etc. is in the majority of cases lack of
experience and thought by the driver, not maliciousness, education not
confrontation is what's needed until this rump of drivers is dealt
with.

Unfortunately research shows that inconsiderate drivers know EXACTLY
what they are doing and that their behaviour is both potentially
dangerous and intimidating. For example TRL 549 'Driver's perceptions
of cyclists' notes that whilst over 75% of drivers will quite willfully
'cut up' a cyclist at a 'pinch point' the same proportion of drivers
also say that such behaviour is dangerous and that they would never do
it!

See, even your information is misleading, how can you find out that
someone is willfully doing something they say they never do.
Unfortunately you've not provided nearly enough information from the
study to get a real conclusion (and I'm not spending 40quid to find it
out) so we don't know the scenario, is the 75% doing an observed
behaviour, in which case then it's likely that they do not equate what
they are doing as the same as the act they were questioned about -
that's a driver training issue.

Much inconsiderate driver behaviour stems from prejudice and a feeling
of superiority over cyclists.

And what about cyclists inconsiderate and illegal behaviour where does
that stem from - seen as your arguments on why CM is a good thing is
based on the fact a minority of drivers are inconsiderate, why is one
allowed and the other not?

Drivers can't even
be 'educated' to drive within the legal speed limit or to not use
hand-held mobile phones!

Or indeed cyclists, on one of my regular rides it's rare to see a
cyclist going under the posted speed limit.

Jim,

On Sat, 08 Oct 2005, Sniper8052 wrote:

occasions I have seen them been little more than an unruly and loud mob
intent on being a pain in the backside to all and sundry. Whilst this may
not be the intent of all those present enough of the riders present this
behavior to tarnish all with the same brush.

That's unacceptable.

It is not acceptable to treat a group of individuals as having the
same intent as some sub-set. Presumably you're also in favour of
deporting all towel-heads? Terrorists teh lot of 'em, eh?

I trust with this policy you'll be forthwith arresting every single
motorist you observe - after all, official government statistsics show
that the majoriuty break the speed limits, and if a majority do
something obviously you may as well treat them all the same.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

ukrc wrote on Sat, 8 Oct 2005
Much inconsiderate driver behaviour stems from prejudice and a feeling
of superiority over cyclists. Unfortunately such social/psychological
problems are not easily modified through education. Drivers can't even
be 'educated' to drive within the legal speed limit or to not use
hand-held mobile phones!

So how do we deal with your own feelings of superiority?
--
Iain Archer To email, please use Reply-To address

Jim,

Regarding the willfully inconsiderate driving of the majority of
motorists. Many observational studies have shown that between 70 and
100% of drivers will overtake a cyclist just before or even at a 'pinch
point' What's more that behaviour is unaffected by signs telling them
not to, the marking of cycle lanes and so on. I myself aided the TRL in
one such study.



TRL 549 showed drivers images of exactly the sort of situations the
above behaviour was observed at. Only 1% of drivers admitted that they
would try to overtake. There was no confusion at all about what sort of
behaviour was under consideration. When questioned further many drivers
admitted that perceived pressure from other drivers to overtake would
cause them to attempt to overtake despite the obvious dangers in doing
so. Similarly, motorists know that they shouldn't overtake cyclists at
speed with only inches to spare and so and, and yet they do it.

TRl 549 concluded that 'the perceived social norm legitimises
incautious behaviour, but leaves drivers free to attribute the cause of
that behaviour to external influences rather than to their own
attitudes.' I.e 'i know what I am doing is wrong, but I am not
responsible for my my own driving behaviour.'

Inconsiderate driving has become a social norm and it seems the only
way to 'educate' motorists that such behaviour is unacceptable is to
start to prosecute drivers who act in such a manner for driving without
consideration. Unfortunately as things currently stand a driver is
likely to escape with a small fine and may not even get a ban even if
they kill a cyclist as a result of such behaviour.

As to much of the illegal behaviour of cyclists, much of this is due to
the fact that many bike riders do not see a bicycle as being a vehicle,
instead regarding it a something akin to a glorified skateboard. Of
course, this view is reinforced by all those drivers who also believe
that 'roads are for cars'. Researchers have noted that cyclists are
often treated as though they should have the responsibilities of both
motor vehicle users and pedestrians whilst having non of the privileges
of either. Consequently it is deemed acceptable for pedestrians to
cross against a red light, but not cyclists (so reinforcing the view
that cyclists should be treated as vehicles). However, at the same time
it is deemed unacceptable for cyclists to act as vehicles if this
causes 'delay' to motor vehicle users. Hence the fondness of traffic
engineers for all those stupid road side 'cycle paths' which suggest
that cyclists should act as though they were pedestrians. The message
that needs to be given to both cyclists and drivers is that cycles are
vehicles with a perfectly legitimate right to use the public road.
Unfortunately far too many drivers would take issue with this...

As to speeding cyclists. If you regularly see speeding cyclists it is
unlikely that they are going fast enough to pose a serious threat.
Perhaps you live somewhere where cyclists ride everywhere at 35-40 Mph,
as do most drivers, but I doubt it.

Iain Archer wrote:

So how do we deal with your own feelings of superiority?


What feelings of superiority? I am an egalitarian whether I am cycling
or driving. Admittedly I do try to keep myself properly informed but I
wouldn't say that this makes me feel 'superior' to the sort of people
who feel content just to regurgitate their own ill-informed prejudices.
However, this doesn't stop me from trying to shed light where there is
darkness ;-)

Jim Ley wrote:

Or indeed cyclists, on one of my regular rides it's rare to see a
cyclist going under the posted speed limit.

Is that in a royal park? If not, then there is no speed limit for
cyclists to exceed. It applies only to motorised vehicles.

...d

On 8 Oct 2005 06:50:37 -0700, wrote:

As to speeding cyclists. If you regularly see speeding cyclists it is
unlikely that they are going fast enough to pose a serious threat.
Perhaps you live somewhere where cyclists ride everywhere at 35-40 Mph,
as do most drivers, but I doubt it.

nope, it's generally 25-30 although you often see serious road
cyclists pushing 40 in a 20 zone (although that's judged by the
relative speed they're passing me doing ~30), something which you very
rarely see cars doing here.

It's interesting that you rationalise the cyclists law breaking as not
posing a threat, but demonise all driving.

Jim.

On 8 Oct 2005 06:59:39 -0700, "David Martin"
wrote:


Jim Ley wrote:

Or indeed cyclists, on one of my regular rides it's rare to see a
cyclist going under the posted speed limit.

Is that in a royal park?

It is indeed.

Jim.