DrivingMissDaisy:
andrew.s:
who do you think would make a good mayor then?Know any benign dictators looking for a job? I’m not really interested in the personalities, it’s policies that count. This latest idea will cost us all financially because ultimately, we, the men and women on the Clapham Omnibus, pick up the bill. And the worst of it is,I can’t see it saving a single life.
i cant pick any holes in that-totally agree…
I actually find Boris rather funny and refreshing, ignorant though he may be 
If they ban the LGV from London that will put thousands more 3.5t vans on the roads. More congestion, more road rage and more accidents. Plus I wonder how many of them would run overweight (ie 2 pallets instead of 1 pallet).
I know one things for sure, so glad I didn’t take that job working outof Tescos down south delivering round London.
I wonder how many drivers would refuse to deliver to London if thèy brought in all these safety measures? Would surely push up the driving rates, unless all the Romanians got the jobs 
And then what would happen to driving standards?
I think it’s easy to see how this discussion could snowball out if control.
I don’t think Boris’ idea goes far enough! Let’s have this public consultation, let’s ask the drivers what they want too.
I’m more than happy to drop my 26 pallets off, on the outskirts of the M25 and let all those ■■■■■■■ ■■■■ wits collect their own ■■■■ in poxy transit vans. I have no interest in driving in London, it’s weight restriction this, width restriction that, selected times on weight restrictions, low emissions, congestion charge, one way systems, ■■■■ the lot of them! The majority of the population there are so far up their own arse it’s unreal!
If they want the cost of their goods to double I’m all for that too bunch of overpaid, arse lickers.
Also the quote of “all HGV’s over 3.5 tonne”, I’m yet to see an HGV under 3.5 tonne, I always thought that was a van!
I have noticed people living in London think they are the bees knees.You see blokes prancing around in full on Lord of the manor tweed jacket,cream colured cords,hunting hat and daft shoes.
Hooray Henry’s.
Spoilt brats living off Mummy and Daddys money.
The women are show offs and posers too,the latest trend to keep up with the Jones’es.
They use terms like juggernauts belching out toxic fumes.They have never heard of Adblue.
Monster trucks mount pavements nearly killing dog walkers.
You could see an attractive women done up like a million dollars or a film star but she may live on a council estate.
Why pretend to be something you are not in London.They do not speak on the tube,if you do,they look at you if you have a mental illness.No staring allowed.Look down.Read the paper.
This like so many issues in the country today is fuelled not by logic and ranshional thought with an open minded approch. No it’s fuelled by an anger, hate, hysterical griff.
I’m very surprized that so many people think these kinds if numbers are a failing in road transport safty.
to be honest the stats on this kind of accident seem amazingly low too me. When you think how many lorrys will drive about London in a single year. Then think how many times each of those lorrys will take a left turn ! Combined It must by near the houndards of thousands of times.
So percentage of accents caused by lorrys turning left fatal and none fatal would be somewhere round what…1 or 2 % at the most out of every left turn made in a single year.
Is that relly that large a problem to go outlawing trucks all over London or to start slapping even more mirrors on truck witch will always have a blind spot on matter what.
Like I said this debate is not being handled with reson and logic. It’s being handled with anger and griff ither of witch are good mind sets to be doing anything in.
NewLad:
I don’t think Boris’ idea goes far enough! Let’s have this public consultation, let’s ask the drivers what they want too.I’m more than happy to drop my 26 pallets off, on the outskirts of the M25 and let all those [zb] [zb] wits collect their own [zb] in poxy transit vans. I have no interest in driving in London, it’s weight restriction this, width restriction that, selected times on weight restrictions, low emissions, congestion charge, one way systems, [zb] the lot of them! The majority of the population there are so far up their own arse it’s unreal!
If they want the cost of their goods to double I’m all for that too bunch of overpaid, arse lickers.
Also the quote of “all HGV’s over 3.5 tonne”, I’m yet to see an HGV under 3.5 tonne, I always thought that was a van!
You forgot Height Restrictions.
Typo.
they will never ban large trucks in london,not even in the centre because they need the convenience of stuff on their doorstep but want you to jump through hoops and pay through the nose to get it there because in their own mind they’re more important than everybody else. 
harry:
Having looked at these snaps of the accidents,the trucks are mostly rigids of the hurry-up ,on a mission type;tippers & so forth,not always the most touchey-feeley spacial aware pilots…?
All cyclists should be made aware of this fact & not assume that the free space alongside the truck is a safe place to be.
Or a better solution would be to make the drivers of these things a bit more aware of their surroundings. “I was in a hurry” isn’t really a valid excuse for not looking out for other road users, after all.
Boris has been looking at the problem from the wrong direction. Just look at the figures and what becomes obvious is that cyclists were 100% involved with the accidents. Not 25% not 50% not 75% but 100%, so the answer is obvious ban cyclists. In one stroke you would reduce the accidents by 100%, result…
ddrbsn:
Boris has been looking at the problem from the wrong direction. Just look at the figures and what becomes obvious is that cyclists were 100% involved with the accidents. Not 25% not 50% not 75% but 100%, so the answer is obvious ban cyclists. In one stroke you would reduce the accidents by 100%, result…
lol
ddrbsn:
Boris has been looking at the problem from the wrong direction. Just look at the figures and what becomes obvious is that cyclists were 100% involved with the accidents. Not 25% not 50% not 75% but 100%, so the answer is obvious ban cyclists. In one stroke you would reduce the accidents by 100%, result…
In jest you’ve managed to get to the nub of the problem…