Cycling in London

[Sesquip]

Every little helps, IMO. The one time I had a serious fall off my bike, there was no traffic around at all. Poor road/cycle lane surface design meant I got a wobble and then got trapped in a gutter so went flying, hit the side of my head and slid along the ground. Would have been a serious head injury if I was helmetless. Now I never get on my bike without it. However, I'm still on the "not compulsory" side of the argument

[WatcherZero]

Gotta love Boris, giving a campaign speech to an audience of cyclists he manages to insult them on three seperate occasions leading to booing. Calling them on one occasion Dredlocked, lycra wearing red traffic light ignorers.

[Sesquip]

Originally Posted by WatcherZero

Gotta love Boris, giving a campaign speech to an audience of cyclists he manages to insult them on three seperate occasions leading to booing. Calling them on one occasion Dredlocked, lycra wearing red traffic light ignorers.

Hah! Is there any reporting of this speech?

[WatcherZero]

Boris Johnson has 'lost the cycle vote', says London lobby group
by Mark Sutton about 7 hours ago


Voting group of 6,000 Londoners to go with candidate most likely to make roads safe for cycling

A pop-up group of 6,000 cyclists in the Capital – Londoners on Bikes – has told BikeBiz "Boris Johnson has lost the bike vote."

Pledging support for the candidate most likely to make roads safer to cycle on, the group has relayed to supporters that Johnson's policies are unlikely to halt the rise of deaths or serious injuries occuring in the city.

The announcement came after the cycling hustings hosted by transport charity Sustrans and The Times yesterday, where Boris Johnson’s performance was dubbed “embarrassing” by a Londoners on Bikes spokesman, and “insulting” by the family of Ellie Carey, who was killed while riding her bike in Southwark last December.


Londoners on Bikes today recommended that cyclists give their first preference vote to Green Party candidate Jenny Jones, and their second to Ken Livingstone.

In a hustings where the Mayor repeatedly appeared to be on the ropes as he was challenged on his claims about the number of deaths and serious injuries to cyclists under his leadership, he defended his policies of prioritising “smoothing traffic flow” over the safety of cyclists and pedestrians, and argued that boosting the number of cyclists was a good way to improve safety.

Alistair Carey, father of Ellie Carey, the London Metropolitan University student who died after being hit by an HGV while riding her bike in Southwark said: “I was insulted by what Boris Johnson said. There seems to be cross-party agreement among all the other candidates that far more needs to be done to improve safety for cyclists – only Boris disagrees.”


Londoners on Bikes spokesman Julian Sayarer said: “Today confirmed what those who ride bikes in London already know: highly visible and very expensive projects such as cycle hire have given Boris Johnson good publicity on cycling, but he has shown no interest in taking the steps which would be needed to save cyclists’ lives.

“Boris’s closing speech –which turned into a confused rant against lycra-wearing cyclists, dreadlocked hippies and green extremists – would have been angering had Boris not appeared so utterly incoherent. It only proved his complete failure to engage with the real issue of the urgent need for better cycling infrastructure."

The audience included at least two Londoners who have lost family members to traffic accidents.

Jenny Jones said that she was “hugely flattered” to be endorsed as the candidate for London’s cycling community.

[Pansori]

Lol, I do have to admit I jump red lights every day (as do many other cyclists). Today I was stupid enough to do that in the presence of a police van... the officer told me off through an open window saying something like "blah blah this and that blah blah blah..." ( I didn't actually hear him because I had my headphones on). I just apologized and rode away.

In any case the cycle hire initiative was a good step forward. London is now at least aware of the fact that there are bicycles around and does not ignore it anymore.

[NCT]

It certainly can be said that certain sections of cyclists make their lives more difficult than necessary by not observing traffic rules and by cycling dangerously and provocatively.

[Malcolm of Kent]

Originally Posted by NCT

It certainly can be said that certain sections of cyclists make their lives more difficult than necessary by not observing traffic rules and by cycling dangerously and provocatively.

Indeed. And Pansori's message just above yours suggests that attitude might also be a factor. (Unless it is ironic - fraid my irony detector is giving ambiguous results).

[citybus]

Ignoring red lights and listening to a walkman is a bit risky

[link_road_17/7]

Originally Posted by kerouac1848

You would never see so many helmets in Holland...

True, I didn't wear a helmet or any hi-vis gear, as I don't feel the 'need' to normally. Yet I felt like the odd one out. Mind you my wheels are bright, day-glo orange.

You'd have thought during the traffic-free ride, people would have took their helmets and viz off to demonstrate a point. I suppose it kept their hair dry instead.

[Sesquip]

Originally Posted by Pansori

Lol, I do have to admit I jump red lights every day (as do many other cyclists). Today I was stupid enough to do that in the presence of a police van... the officer told me off through an open window saying something like "blah blah this and that blah blah blah..." ( I didn't actually hear him because I had my headphones on). I just apologized and rode away

I really hope you're on a wind up here

[Pansori]

Originally Posted by citybus

Ignoring red lights and listening to a walkman is a bit risky

It depends. I'd never do that on a new unexplored route. The most important aspect of safety is being able to see and evaluate what's around you. Having ridden my daily route for over 500 times by now I certainly have that feeling on relevant sections of the road.

To add to the point of safety... I have observed one rather strange phenomenon which I have never noticed before. Drivers in London (I don't know about elsewhere in the UK) for some reason fail to use turn indicators in most situations where they are compulsory. In some instances only one in 4-5 cars would do that which is rather shocking. That is especially dangerous for cyclists as knowing and predicting the movement of car in front of you is a key factor to safety.

[WatcherZero]

Thats a bugbear of mine Pansori, I dont know the technical term but its a T junction where the road turns 90 degrees but theres also a turning off by going straight on, cars should signal left to leave the road but they dont.

[Pansori]

Originally Posted by WatcherZero

Thats a bugbear of mine Pansori, I dont know the technical term but its a T junction where the road turns 90 degrees but theres also a turning off by going straight on, cars should signal left to leave the road but they dont.

I think the idea of turning indicators is that you have to use them every time you're preparing to make a turn and leave your lane. And it has to be used way before the actual maneuver and NOT just during it (something many drivers also forget). I don't know what's so hard for some drivers to grasp here. I was taught so by my driving instructor and have no problem with that.

[NCT]

There is an element of one rule for London and another for everyone else when it comes to driving standards. I suppose London's roads do tend to be more complex and less consistent than elsewhere, which partly explains why driving is more 'spontaneous', e.g. you don't really have much opportunity to signal in advance without confusing other people who might think you are turning somewhere else. Sometimes reading brakelights and wheel directions can be useful IMO.

[Squirrelking]

I take it you are aware that a helmet is designed to prevent injuries at low-medium speeds and will do the sum total of fuck all in the event of a high speed collision? That's why they should be worn at all times, I'm a proficient cyclist and have ridden my whole life (everything from road to full on downhill) and believe me when I say it's not the drivers you need them for (unless they clip you). I'd be more concerned with gaping potholes throwing me over the bars or lemmings walking out in front of me than using my head to fend off stray Astras.

As for doing a journey Xhundred times so it's okay. How do you know nobody will run a red light or pull in front of you? Complacency is always a killer.

[Pansori]

Originally Posted by Squirrelking

I take it you are aware that a helmet is designed to prevent injuries at low-medium speeds and will do the sum total of fuck all in the event of a high speed collision? That's why they should be worn at all times, I'm a proficient cyclist and have ridden my whole life (everything from road to full on downhill) and believe me when I say it's not the drivers you need them for (unless they clip you). I'd be more concerned with gaping potholes throwing me over the bars or lemmings walking out in front of me than using my head to fend off stray Astras.

Tell this to the Dutch

As for doing a journey Xhundred times so it's okay. How do you know nobody will run a red light or pull in front of you? Complacency is always a killer.

And how do you know a 747 won't crash ontp you... or maybe you'll just die of a heart attack while during your daily cycling commute because you were unaware of that clog that is maybe sitting in your veins somewhere?

I've crashed many times in the past. Never wore a helmet (I tried though... it's obstructing the movement of head and causes discomfort so making things more dangerous and generally worse than better). I'm still here.

All it takes is some common sense to reduce the chances of a crash and injuries. Helmet is not part of it.

[Squirrelking]

Originally Posted by Pansori

All it takes is some common sense to reduce the chances of a crash and injuries. Helmet is not part of it.

I'm sure you would have a very different opinion if you ended up shitting yourself and eating through a straw for the rest of your life after an easily preventable injury.

[Pansori]

Originally Posted by Squirrelking

I'm sure you would have a very different opinion if you ended up shitting yourself and eating through a straw for the rest of your life after an easily preventable injury.

There is a much higher chance of that if you're not having a healthy diet and are overweight/obese which in result increases the chance of a stroke and the consequences you mention. Again, all it takes is some common sense. Helmet may help sometimes but its potential for daily cycling conditions is very limited.

[Malcolm of Kent]

Originally Posted by Pansori

...I'm still here.

All it takes is some common sense to reduce the chances of a crash and injuries. Helmet is not part of it.

That is your choice. Your argument is known as "argument from personal survival", and it has been used to defend all kinds of risky behaviours, most noticably smoking (Uncle Albert smoked 40 a day all his life and he lived to the age of 103).

However, cycling without a helmet is only a mildly risky behaviour, though as has been stated if you happen to be the unlucky one, you just might suffer big time from it. But let's hope you don't choose the chamber with the bullet in it.

It has also been argued by some that compulsory helmets would actually cost lives, because fewer people would gain the health benefits of cycling if they were put off it by helmet laws. And there certainly are health benefits, both to the cyclist themself and also all the other people who do not have to breathe the diesel fumes which the cyclists do not emit!

[Squirrelking]

*shrugs*

Cyclists aren't cool anyway. I'd rather think for myself and stay safe than be a sheep and end up being a burden on my family.