Bazj Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Rod King is a tree hugging numpty and wants us all to return to having a man walking in front of those infernal horeless carriages waving a flag Cyclists are the single worse abusers of traffic laws and they face no consequence for their actions. Time to start a campaign against creeping through red lights or jumping on the pavement to miss the traffic lights under Hawleys Lane bridge etc Mind you, I had on cyclist do that to me a few years ago; just as the lights turned green. There was a bit of water under the bridge and I passed through it, just as the pavement riding cyclist was mid-undrerpass...... result! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disgusted Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 Rod King is a tree hugging numpty and wants us all to return to having a man walking in front of those infernal horeless carriages waving a flag Cyclists are the single worse abusers of traffic laws and they face no consequence for their actions. Time to start a campaign against creeping through red lights or jumping on the pavement to miss the traffic lights under Hawleys Lane bridge etc Mind you, I had on cyclist do that to me a few years ago; just as the lights turned green. There was a bit of water under the bridge and I passed through it, just as the pavement riding cyclist was mid-undrerpass...... result! Come come Baz, surely you know by now that motorists jump as many red lights as car drivers At least that's the drivel that guy spouts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 5, 2009 Report Share Posted February 5, 2009 and if that were the case they would be an awful lot of car crashes at traffic lights.... which there aren't apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Well I for one have a lot of respect for Chris Mayes. I know he is fighting a tough battle but it's not only cyclist's lives that will be saved. It will also provide a safer environment for school children and the elderly. They will both have a greater chance of surviving a collision with a motor vehicle at 20 mph then at 30! This was brought home to me when I gave a lift home to an 82 year old who was knocked over by a white van in Bridge Street the other week. He ended up with shock and a few bruises, it the van had been travelling above 20 he would have ended up in hospital or worse. It might be all right for you self-confessed speed freak in your vehicles but spare a thought for the rest who aren't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyMac Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Cyclists are the single worse abusers of traffic laws and they face no consequence for their actions. If you gave me a shiny English poond for every traffic violation I'd ever witnessed, whilst I'd have a fairly big pile of poonds caused by cyclists, I'd have an absolutely huge pile of poonds caused by motorists. And neither the cyclists nor the motorists have faced consequences for their actions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disgusted Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Cyclists are the single worse abusers of traffic laws and they face no consequence for their actions. If you gave me a shiny English poond for every traffic violation I'd ever witnessed, whilst I'd have a fairly big pile of poonds caused by cyclists, I'd have an absolutely huge pile of poonds caused by motorists. And neither the cyclists nor the motorists have faced consequences for their actions. Of course you would, but pro-rata the amount per cyclist would be massive compared to that of motorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 We mustn't forget the poor pedestrians, the 20mph is essential for them to stay alive. I drive a mini bus on a regular basis for a disability group and I've lost count of the number of pedetrians in the roads around the centre of twon who walk out into the road, walk backwards into the road, run across as soon as they see me coming etc etc My passnegers may be visually impaired but they are not suicidal pedsetrians in Warrington are! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 run across as soon as they see me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 We mustn't forget the poor pedestrians, the 20mph is essential for them to stay alive. I drive a mini bus on a regular basis for a disability group and I've lost count of the number of pedetrians in the roads around the centre of twon who walk out into the road, walk backwards into the road, run across as soon as they see me coming etc etc My passnegers may be visually impaired but they are not suicidal pedsetrians in Warrington are! So why penalise the motorist just because Warrington pedestrians are stupid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Why all this fuss between 20mph and 30mph. Human beings are designed to walk at about 4mph. If we were meant to travel faster we would be born with feathers. p.s............I don't like shopping trollies either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 18, 2009 Report Share Posted February 18, 2009 Intersting Victor Have any studies been carried out regarding the number of injuries caused to 'pedestrians' by shopping trollies. I could add a few points to the statistics if needed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victor Posted February 19, 2009 Report Share Posted February 19, 2009 Dismayed, the reason that I mentioned shopping trollies is that they very often have the opposite effect on speeding. I go into a supermarket, get a trolley (is there an "e" in trolly?) and travel around at my natural 4mph. I invariably get stuck behind someone, gazing at the shelves, doing no more than 1mph. There should be double yellow lines down all the isles in supermarkets and on the spot fines for anyone who is loitering. As for your question about accidents caused by shopping trollies................well, I once saw a driver reversing in the car park, hit a shopping trolley which was shunted into another vehicle and scratched it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted February 19, 2009 Report Share Posted February 19, 2009 Don't get me started on shopping trolley drivers!!!! Why do people slow to a crawl as soon as they get hold of one. It's a shopping trolley not a Zimmer frame!!!! Not to mention two of them blocking the aisle because the drivers haven't seen each other since this morning and need to catch up on the gossip!! well I told you not to get me started - I can feel a whole new thread coming on. NURSE! NURSE!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 19, 2009 Report Share Posted February 19, 2009 I saw one of these 20mph signs in Long Lane, it was tiny - could cause an accident with folk staining to read it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 I saw one of these 20mph signs in Long Lane, it was tiny - could cause an accident with folk staining to read it! But of course they are wanting you to miss it so that they can get you with the speed cameras!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Noticed yesterday that there are some of the new 20mph speed signs up on the road outside the Town Hall... I wonder why 'they' get it outside their place of work but most schools in the area still don't qualify for a 20mph zone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmina Fothergill Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 apparently the 18 month trial is to reduce accidents to children and cyclists. And of course they'll get the figures they want - because less people will use this stretch of road, making accident figures fall here and rise elsewhere. Warrington Borough Council may be incompetent and dishonest, but they're also cunning. Of course the trouble is, they're dishonest enough to carry out a traffic census and falsely claim the traffic volume is the same as it was previously. There's no way for most of us to check their figures. They can claim whatever they like - and I'm sure they know it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmina Fothergill Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 they need a 20mph speed limit on Long Lane..... but only at school times. This would be handy so that the stupid kids that come out of the high school down there can walk (amble) across the road without looking; safe in the knowledge that if a car hits them it shouldn't kill them. I am sure the kids at that place have absolutely no sense whatsoever as I don't recall seeing one ever use the pedestrian lights; prefering instead to chance running across the road I can confirm that. In fact this is a strong argument against this 20 MPH limit. Given the fact that the kids from the school are stupid when it comes to traffic, it would make a lot more sense to give them normal road conditions and teach them some traffic sense. Give them an unnaturally low speed limit and leave them in their current belief that they can safely run into the road at any point, and they're far more likely to be seriously injured or killed when they encounter proper roads. Though I suppose there's some added danger with the new limit because they're more likely to be hit by some unfortunate driver who's been put in the position of watching his speedometer to make sure s/he's doing 19 MPH and not 21 and doesn't see the idiot jumping into the road ahead for a vital fraction of a second. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 I've noticed that J-walking is on the increase; idiots will simply walk out infront of you nowadays, knowing you can brake in time at 20mph. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted February 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Last week I had one nutter in Penketh deliberately jump in front of me and who then just lay down in the road and refused to move. When a queue of cars formed and began blowing horns, he eventually got up, dropped his pants and waved an extremely small penis at me. I distinctly remember thinking I didn?t think it was quite that cold. Bill makes note to himself; must do even more to save planet for future generations. I was a bit taken back last week when Rod King (a major supported of 20mph limits) agreed that the council had made a bad choice of roads for their ?tests? by specifying main commuter routes and A roads rather than genuinely residential roads. I doubt these limits will have a great affect on the actual volume of traffic using roads such as Long Lane as there is very little in the way of alternative routes. And if it did result in a flow reduction, all that would prove is that the planners had managed to divert traffic from a main ?A? road into residential back roads. As for the fact that there?s a school there well that really is just too much for our planners to understand. Last year John Drake (a council employed expert) told me that 20mph limits will never ever work without speed bumps because he?d tried them outside several schools and statistically there was little difference. When pressed on the point however he conceded that people did in fact slow down but only at school times. I rest my case mi lud! Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Speaking of Schools and 20mph speed limits.... Back in 2003 the following 12 schools were approved (if that's the right word) to have 20mph speed limits introduced around their perimiters after being invited to apply and submit their cases Beaumont Infant and Junior Schools (Fairfield and Howley) Cherry Tree Primary (Lymm) Gt Sankey Primary School (Gt Sankey South) Gt Sankey High School (Whittle Hall) Long Lane Primary (Orford) Our Lady?s Primary (Latchford) Penketh High School (Gt Sankey South) Sir Thomas Boteler High School (Westy) St Augustines Primary School (Westy) Stockton Heath Primary (Stockton Heath) Winwick Primary School (Burtonwood and Winwick). Did any of them actually get it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 My office is on Long Lane and going down there on Monday with my Cruise control set at 21mph (I am lucky enough to have a car that will run at 20 mph on cruise!! Some knob in a brand new Astra boy racer mobile was on my tail until we got past flare.... then he floored it past me at about 50 and made a rude gesture at me as though I was in the wrong! Where was the camera van then?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Posted February 25, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 I went down there last week as a passenger and reminded my driver that that the limit?s now 20 (he was doing just over 30) to which he replied that he was only doing exactly the same speed as the cars both in front and behind him. Now in this situation, the dilemma is, do you slow down to 20 and risk frustrating those behind or go with the flow even though it?s technically breaking the rules? Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Errm, on balance; go with the flow! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmina Fothergill Posted February 25, 2009 Report Share Posted February 25, 2009 Simple answer: either the driver behind gets frustrated because no one in their right mind would expect a 20 MPH limit, and they're too busy watching the back of your car (expecting some sudden daft manouver) to notice the half-size speed limit signs - so there's a risk of accident when they speed up as you turn off. Or someone who naturally expects a normal speed limit suddenly sees one of the signs and slams their brakes on to avoid being fined, and there's a risk of accident because of that. So what do you do? Well, in my case I'm avoiding this stretch of road to make sure neither of the above likely scenarios happen to me. That doesn't solve anything for the rest of us, I know. But we seem to be powerless to prevent people imposing their stupid ideas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.3ba2d545854d2844adb911806b68eb4b.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.